Solidarity is for other people: identifying derelictions of solidarity in responses to COVID-19

West-Oram, Peter G N

doi:10.1136/medethics-2020-106522

Cited by 33 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The dereliction of clinical governance during the current healthcare crisis has implications beyond the tragic analysis we may perform today. Sadly, it represents a historical setback not only professionally, but also socially, contributing to solidarity failures ( 23 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Salus Populi Suprema Lex”: Considerations on the Initial Response of the United Kingdom to the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Favi

Leonardis

Manzia

et al. 2021

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In several countries worldwide, the initial response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been heavily criticized by general public, media, and healthcare professionals, as well as being an acrimonious topic in the political debate. The present article elaborates on some aspects of the United Kingdom (UK) primary reaction to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic; specifically, from February to July 2020. The fact that the UK showed the highest mortality rate in Western Europe following the first wave of COVID-19 certainly has many contributing causes; each deserves an accurate analysis. We focused on three specific points that have been insofar not fully discussed in the UK and not very well known outside the British border: clinical governance, access to hospital care or intensive care unit, and implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions. The considerations herein presented on these fundamental matters will likely contribute to a wider and positive discussion on public health, in the context of an unprecedented crisis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Salus Populi Suprema Lex”: Considerations on the Initial Response of the United Kingdom to the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Favi

Leonardis

Manzia

et al. 2021

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The value of taking a relational approach to public health ethics -requiring a "conception of persons as embedded within communities in particular ways" 63 -has often been emphasised, especially in the context of pandemic response 64,65 , with the recognition that many public health interventions rely on community solidarity for their effectiveness 66 . As Bayliss et al state, "[t]o be successful in public health, we must acknowledge our mutual vulnerability… we need to recognize that the pursuit of public goods for health, for the benefit of us all requires trust, collective responsibility and accountability."…”

Section: Responsibilities Between Students and Institutions Main Recommendation: Clarify That Institutions And Students Both Have Responsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing an ethical framework for asymptomatic COVID-19 testing programmes in higher education institutions

Cox¹,

Ansari²,

McLaughlin³

et al. 2021

Wellcome Open Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Mass asymptomatic COVID-19 testing programmes are being introduced in a range of settings, including in higher education institutions (HEIs). We aimed to produce an ethical framework to identify the range of ethical considerations relevant to HEI testing programmes and to support organisational decision-making. Methods: We conducted a mixed-method consultation (survey and semi-structured interviews) with students and staff at a case study university that was running a student testing programme. Survey data were analysed descriptively; data analysis for interviews was based on the Framework method. The findings of the consultation were combined with literature review, legal/ethical analysis and expert views to produce an ethical framework. Results: A total of 239 people took part in the consultation: 213 completed surveys (189 students, 24 staff) and 26 (16 students, 7 staff) participated in interviews. The survey identified clear support (99% of survey respondents) for the testing programme. Around two-thirds (62%) supported non-mandatory participation. Over half (54%) felt that the programme would need to be at least moderately effective to be acceptable. Over three-quarters (76%) felt the university had some responsibility to run a testing programme. Synthesis of consultation findings and further analysis identified nine areas of ethical consideration for HEIs looking to implement mass asymptomatic testing programmes: design and operation; goals; properties of the test; enabling isolation; choices about participation; benefits, harms and opportunity costs; responsibilities between students and institutions; privacy, confidentiality and data-sharing; and communication. The ethical framework includes recommendations in each of these areas, with illustrative examples of how they might be put into practice. Conclusions: By identifying ethical considerations relevant to university student testing programmes using analysis and consultation, the framework we developed has potential to facilitate deliberation about ethical aspects of such programmes, as well as informing decision-making about their introduction, design and delivery.

show abstract

“…2,3 This contrasts to the otherwise tragic outcome of nearly 160,000 UK COVID-19 deaths to date, 4 attributed by many, including government officials, to national leadership failures. [5][6][7][8][9][10] Ealing and NWL were, at times, among the hardest hit localities. To date, Ealing has seen 31,802 cases, with a rate of 14,034.5 per 100,000 people, higher than rates in NWL, London, and England (see Table 1).…”

Section: Impact Of Covid-19 In Ealingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence Review: Achieving COVID-19 Vaccine Equity in Ealing and North West London

Hrynick¹,

Ripoll²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review sets out key considerations for improving vaccine equity – as well as broader health equity – in the North West London (NWL) borough of Ealing. It foregrounds the political, economic and social dynamics which have perpetuated health inequalities during and prior to COVID-19, and how they have manifested to shape COVID-19 vaccine accessibility and uptake among different social groups. It also highlights how local actors have sought to address these inequalities. By bringing together data and insights from existing social science research and consultations with people involved in local COVID-19 vaccination efforts (in local authorities, the NHS and community groups), we point to ways local authorities and healthcare providers, in collaboration with local people and organisations, can support vaccine equity – and health equity more broadly – now, and into the future. Critical to this are further efforts to integrate sensitivity to context, sustain collaborative working, build trust and meaningfully engage citizens (especially vulnerable groups), and support a robust civil society. The review begins with summary key considerations for operational actors. This review was produced by SSHAP in collaboration with Ealing Council. It was authored by Tabitha Hrynick and Santiago Ripoll, and reviewed by Maddy Gupta-Wright, Ellen Schwartz, and Nikita Simpson. It is the responsibility of SSHAP

show abstract

Solidarity is for other people: identifying derelictions of solidarity in responses to COVID-19

Cited by 33 publications

References 12 publications

“Salus Populi Suprema Lex”: Considerations on the Initial Response of the United Kingdom to the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

“Salus Populi Suprema Lex”: Considerations on the Initial Response of the United Kingdom to the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Developing an ethical framework for asymptomatic COVID-19 testing programmes in higher education institutions

Evidence Review: Achieving COVID-19 Vaccine Equity in Ealing and North West London

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About