As the Covid19 pandemic continues to sweep the world, states are
struggling to shape policies according to their epidemiological
situation, resources and political possibilities. It is very obvious
that all this policy-making has far-reaching ethical implications on
many levels. It regards the identification of relevant values, the
balancing of these in cases of conflicts, the pragmatics of implementing
"ideal" solutions in a non-ideal world, and the normative aspect of
deciding how competing institutional "rules" or "guidelines" for balancing values and implementing the
outcome may be traded off in cases of tension.
All of this is, of
course, a well-known aspect of the area of
public health ethics, such as
it has evolved over the last two decades. It regards both principal
issues of
what should be done, and issues about
how this
should be done to be done in an acceptable way. These issues are
especially complicated due to the multi-sectorial and multi-level
nature of public health, and the advanced and dynamic uncertainty under
which all decisions on pandemic (and much other public health) policy needs to be taken.
One level is, of course, the implications for the healthcare system and, in effect, clinical medical ethics, of a far-reaching public health crisis, such as a pandemic. In this area, I was engaged, together with several colleagues with direct experience of this particular issue, in a working party that speed developed
specific guidelines for ICU resource allocation for the Swedish context. However, albeit thorny and highly complex ethical considerations are recognised to be built into both public health and infectious disease policy in the Swedish central policy document in this area,
the Swedish public health authorities have no organised way of dealing with the ethical tensions that necessarily appear on a daily basis. This inspired some of my colleagues – themselves not public health ethicists but recognising the need – to publish
a plea for an ethics councel function to be linked to the Swedish public health agency, Folkhälsomyndigheten. Such a councel has to involve different comnpetences, of course, besides public health ethics and relevant health science, not least advanced knowledge of (relevant) law, economics and politics.
Interestingly, I have been recently involved in exactly this type of endeavour related to Covid19, not in Sweden, but in Germany. It started when I was contacted, as one of several public health ethics specialists, to be part of an ad hoc ethics briefing to the Bavarian public health authorities with regard to sevaral of the type of basic value and norm.-conflicts briefly sketched above. The work was led from the Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich, where
Verina Wild (bioethicist and public health specialist), quickly organised an international expert group to answer a set of questions formulated by the state authorities.
This work (with links to the full briefing from the group to the Bavarian authorities) is described here. Additionally,
the German federal Ethikrat has issued several statements on the ethical dimensions of the Covid19 policy response, and also there specific public health ethical competence is in place, eg.
Alena Buyx.
|
Lägg till bildtext |
In addition, German scholarly organisations in social medicine and public health have organised a
Covid19 "competence centre"
with specific working groups being coordinated for several areas, one
of which is ethics. The coordinators for ethics is, once again, Verina
Wild and her Munich colleagues Jan-Christoph Heilinger and Georg
Marckmann, and they have invited a broad group of international scholars
from the public health ethics field, among these myself. We have just
finalised the first policy brief, which attempts to sketch in a few
pages the complex landscape of consideration offered from a public
health ethical perspective on pandemic policy.
The final versionis now public via the competence centre website. A number of more specific
briefs are planned, and will appear shortly.
I do believe that many states would do well to follow the German example. Besides the expertise of discovering, describing and analysing ethical and related legal and political dilemmas, relevant scholars are also able to articulate more clearly the logic of reasoning behind made policy decisions, thereby helping governments and agencies to better dodge conspiracy-like speculations of why certain decisions are made due to hazy explanations and arguments. Among these, my own country Sweden, where there already exist a number of internationally recognized public health ethics scholars, besides myself, e.g., Bengt Brülde, Jessica Nihlén Fahlqvist, Kalle Grill and Erik Malmqvist, and additional legal scholarly expertise relating to the health policy area, such as Moa Kindström Dahlin and Ulrika Sandén.
*