'THIS IS NO COUNTRY FOR OLD (WO)MEN'? AN EXAMINATION OF THE APPROACH TAKEN TO CARE HOME RESIDENTS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q1 LAW Medical Law Review Pub Date : 2023-02-27 DOI:10.1093/medlaw/fwac023
Clayton Ó Néill
{"title":"'THIS IS NO COUNTRY FOR OLD (WO)MEN'? AN EXAMINATION OF THE APPROACH TAKEN TO CARE HOME RESIDENTS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.","authors":"Clayton Ó Néill","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwac023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article discusses the human rights of residents in care homes in England who were affected by restrictions that were imposed during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to safeguard health and life at a time of public health emergency. It focuses on the potentially adversarial relationship between the need to protect the health of these residents and the possible adverse interferences with their human rights in the initial phase of the pandemic. The scope and application of these rights to the healthcare context is not straightforward due to the exigencies of the pandemic. Consideration is given to whether their rights, as protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are vindicated or breached by the actions taken in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The article questions whether the restrictions that were applied were justified, given the limitations that exist within some ECHR Articles. It deliberates upon what can be done to ensure that relevant bodies and care homes, themselves, are better enabled to respond to a public health emergency in an individualistic, rights-based manner, based upon both principlism and pragmatism.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"31 1","pages":"25-46"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9384513/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwac023","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This article discusses the human rights of residents in care homes in England who were affected by restrictions that were imposed during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to safeguard health and life at a time of public health emergency. It focuses on the potentially adversarial relationship between the need to protect the health of these residents and the possible adverse interferences with their human rights in the initial phase of the pandemic. The scope and application of these rights to the healthcare context is not straightforward due to the exigencies of the pandemic. Consideration is given to whether their rights, as protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are vindicated or breached by the actions taken in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The article questions whether the restrictions that were applied were justified, given the limitations that exist within some ECHR Articles. It deliberates upon what can be done to ensure that relevant bodies and care homes, themselves, are better enabled to respond to a public health emergency in an individualistic, rights-based manner, based upon both principlism and pragmatism.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“这不是老男人的国家”?COVID-19大流行期间对养老院居民采取的方法的审查。
本文讨论了在COVID-19大流行的头几个月里,为了在突发公共卫生事件时保障健康和生命,英国养老院居民受到限制的人权。它侧重于保护这些居民健康的需要与在大流行病初期可能对其人权造成的不利干扰之间可能存在的对立关系。由于疫情的迫切性,这些权利在卫生保健方面的范围和适用并不简单。考虑到在2019冠状病毒病大流行背景下采取的行动是否维护或违反了《欧洲人权公约》和《联合国残疾人权利公约》所保护的残疾人权利。鉴于《欧洲人权公约》某些条款中存在的限制,该条质疑所施加的限制是否合理。它审议了可以采取哪些措施,以确保有关机构和护理院本身能够更好地以个人主义和基于权利的方式,在原则和实用主义的基础上,对突发公共卫生事件作出反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Law Review
Medical Law Review MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Law Review is established as an authoritative source of reference for academics, lawyers, legal and medical practitioners, law students, and anyone interested in healthcare and the law. The journal presents articles of international interest which provide thorough analyses and comment on the wide range of topical issues that are fundamental to this expanding area of law. In addition, commentary sections provide in depth explorations of topical aspects of the field.
期刊最新文献
Towards a rights-based approach for disabled women's access to abortion. Addressing the consequences of the corporatization of reproductive medicine. Guy's and St Thomas'-v-Knight [2021] EWHC 25: Dignity in English law. Donor conception, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, choices, and procedural justice: an argument for reform of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Anticipatory declarations in obstetric care: a relational and spatial examination of patient empowerment, institutional impacts and temporal challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1