Claar Sbu 333 Assignment 8
Claar Sbu 333 Assignment 8
Claar Sbu 333 Assignment 8
Christina Claar
Seton Hill University
Public health is an area that requires ethical decision making in nearly every aspect.
There are different principles of ethics that come into play where public health is involved,
especially beneficence and autonomy. The goal of public health initiatives is to create a healthy
community and society, so officials responsible for making decisions need to consider how their
actions will affect the whole community over the individual while still recognizing and
respecting an individual’s rights. There are differing perspectives on how much authority public
health policies have to exert so much influence on the lives of the people in the affected
communities; some believe that their individual rights are more deserving of respect than the
protection of the whole, while others argue that the good of the whole does nothing but benefit
the individual as well. Recent mandates that have been implemented as results of the COVID-19
pandemic have shed new light on the importance of balancing public health initiatives with the
rights of the individual and the needs of the community, as well as considering the needs of more
vulnerable populations.
Incorporating virtue ethics into public health comes with benefits across the board for
health officials and members of the populations they serve. There are many reasons ethics are
important to public health, but three most important. First, the focus on collective health runs the
risk of neglecting individual interests, rights and values, and public health requires careful
considerations to balance the good of the one with the good of the whole. Second, public health
care does not typically involve personalized care, so decisions are made from a distanced and
overarching perspective that would benefit from ethical mindfulness to compassionately consider
the needs of the population. Finally, the decisions made by public health professionals have a
significant impact on the lives of those in the community, so officials must be aware of the
responsibility they have to the population and use it wisely (Fahlquist, 2019).
Public health professionals have a responsibility to the public, and therefore their
decisions are not made lightly. There are many factors to be considered, especially during a
pandemic, when introducing new policies that will impact the community. A virus that presents a
threat to public health requires a response that is rooted in beneficence, or the most good for the
most people. This can sometimes cause backlash from the public, but the point remains that
“unless we gave infinite resources, we can’t have and do whatever we want, whenever we want”
(Koons, 2020). In other words, no decision is going to please everyone, but a decision must be
made regardless. During a pandemic, resources are stretched thin, and the goal is use as few as
necessary to avoid hospitals being overrun because of illnesses that could have been prevented
Protecting the whole does not happen without including the more vulnerable populations
of the community as well, as they may often require extra considerations due to disabilities and
preexisting conditions. Policies to protect these groups were already lacking before the COVID-
19 pandemic, so members of these populations were faced with additional struggles (Sabatello,
Burke, McDonald, & Appelbaum, 2020). Quarantine orders made it more difficult for those with
limited mobility to access necessary resources such as food and medicine, and others struggled to
receive needed medical care from providers who were stretched thin. People in rural areas faced
added challenges as well, as many members of those populations are older on average and
therefore at higher risk of complications from contracting the virus due to age and other common
comorbidities (Chillag & Lee, 2020). Also at risk are those with preexisting mental health
conditions that require ongoing treatment; it has been argued that lockdowns are prone to
damage mental health disproportionately, with vulnerable and disadvantaged people being at an
decision-making practices when public health is a concern so that individual rights are not
violated. First, one must examine the role and nature of public health to understand how some
decisions that may seem unethical are only to benefit the greater good. When discussing the
measures taken to mitigate the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, one issue that has been
heavily debated is that of protecting the whole at the consequence of the individual. Mandates
such as mask wearing in public and stay-at-home orders have been accused of violating an
individual’s rights, but the goal has always been to slow the spread of the virus for the good of
all.
Another side of the argument for individual rights is that of protection; those who favor
the public health mandates often do so because they feel there is no price too high to save a life.
However, to public health officials, there is only value in the whole, and unfortunately,
sometimes tradeoffs will happen to keep more people safe. This does not mean that the policies
are morally wrong; due to the fragility of humankind, nearly every activity has an inherent risk
of danger or death, so it is not possible for public health professionals to prevent every loss of
life (Koons, 2020). If stay-at-home orders must be lifted to ensure society continues to function
in the long-term, it is worth the potential resulting loss of life for the benefit of the whole
community. The risk with this approach appears when health officials may “neglect the rights
and values of individuals through their attitudes and behaviors toward the public” (Fahlquist,
2019). For this reason, ethics must be an integral part of developing public health practices and
policies.
To combat the spread of the COVID-19 virus, public health officials implemented social
distancing policies, isolation and quarantine measures, and gathering limitations. Many found
these to be controversial because they “raise tensions between individual freedoms and public
goods, place disproportionate burdens on persons with few resources and other vulnerabilities,
and can be abused because they involve restriction of civil liberties” (Chillag & Lee, 2020).
Others are concerned that the rate at which these measures were imposed sets a dangerous
precedent for public health policies in the future as they “permitted the suspension of a wide
range of human rights” (Cheung & Ip, 2020). For these reasons and others, the popular view is to
reform public health policies to be more mindful of virtue ethics and human rights going
forward.
Suggestions for public health reform come following the United States’ failure to respond
initially to the COVID-19 pandemic and a presidential administration that undermined and
maligned public health (Frieden, Rajkumar, & Mostashari, 2021). This begins by understanding
the primary purpose of public health – protecting the public from health risks. The system can be
improved and made more efficient if the public health officials strengthen the public health
system, reorient healthcare delivery to reward providers for managing the overall health of
populations efficiently, and empower individuals to make healthier decisions by addressing the
preventable root causes of poor health. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance
of individual behavior in health outcomes, and the individual supports the good of the whole
(Frieden, Rajkumar, & Mostashari, 2021). Without acknowledging that the public health system
is in need of updates, it will continue to fail the members of the population most in need of its
Public health departments across the world faced unprecedented times with the onset of
the COVID-19 pandemic, and while it is clear that many aspects could have been handled
differently, the results can be used to learn and improve the existing systems. Using ethical
practices and decision-making is of the upmost importance to ensure the best decisions are being
made for the whole population while balancing the consequences with the need to protect
individual’s rights and privacy. Provisions must be in place to support those in disadvantaged
and vulnerable populations, such as those in rural areas, those with mental illnesses, and those
with disabilities, to guarantee access to all necessary care and resources. With ethics in mind,
public health officials have the opportunity now to redesign the systems and provide the best
References
Cheung, D., & Ip, E. C. (2020). COVID-19 Lockdowns: a Public Mental Health Ethics
org.setonhill.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s41649-020-00144-0
Chillag, K. L., & Lee, L. M. (2020). Synergistic Disparities and Public Health Mitigation of
https://doi-org.setonhill.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10049-0
Fahlquist, J. N. (2019). Public Health and the Virtues of Responsibility, Compassion and
https://doi-org.setonhill.idm.oclc.org/10.1093/phe/phz007
Frieden, T. R., Rajkumar, R., & Mostashari, F. (2021). We Must Fix US Health and Public
org.setonhill.idm.oclc.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.306125
Gostin, L. O., Friedman, E. A., & Wetter, S. A. (2020). Responding to Covid‐19: How to
Koons, R. C. (2020). Prudence in the Pandemic. First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion &
Sabatello, M., Burke, T. B., McDonald, K. E., & Appelbaum, P. S. (2020). Disability, Ethics,
Health, 110(10), 1523–1527.
https://doi-org.setonhill.idm.oclc.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.305837