Understanding Pandemic Solidarity: Mutual Support During the First COVID-19 Lockdown in the United Kingdom

IF 1.4 3区哲学 Q2 ETHICS Public Health Ethics Pub Date : 2023-12-09 DOI:10.1093/phe/phad024

Stephanie Johnson, Stephen Roberts, Sarah Hayes, Amelia Fiske, Federica Lucivero, Stuart McLennan, Amicia Phillips, Gabrielle Samuel, Barbara Prainsack

{"title":"Understanding Pandemic Solidarity: Mutual Support During the First COVID-19 Lockdown in the United Kingdom","authors":"Stephanie Johnson, Stephen Roberts, Sarah Hayes, Amelia Fiske, Federica Lucivero, Stuart McLennan, Amicia Phillips, Gabrielle Samuel, Barbara Prainsack","doi":"10.1093/phe/phad024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of solidarity has been invoked frequently. Much interest has centred around how citizens and communities support one another during times of uncertainty. Yet, empirical research which accounts and understands citizen’s views on pandemic solidarity, or their actual practices has remained limited. Drawing upon the analysis of data from 35 qualitative interviews, this article investigates how residents in England and Scotland enacted, understood, or criticised (the lack of) solidarity during the first national lockdown in the United Kingdom in April 2020—at a time when media celebrated solidarity as being at an all-time high. It finds that although solidarity was practiced by some people, the perceived lack of solidarity was just as pronounced. We conclude that despite frequent mobilisations of solidarity by policy makers and other public actors, actual practices of solidarity are poorly understood—despite the importance of solidarity for public health and policy.","PeriodicalId":49136,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Ethics","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/phad024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of solidarity has been invoked frequently. Much interest has centred around how citizens and communities support one another during times of uncertainty. Yet, empirical research which accounts and understands citizen’s views on pandemic solidarity, or their actual practices has remained limited. Drawing upon the analysis of data from 35 qualitative interviews, this article investigates how residents in England and Scotland enacted, understood, or criticised (the lack of) solidarity during the first national lockdown in the United Kingdom in April 2020—at a time when media celebrated solidarity as being at an all-time high. It finds that although solidarity was practiced by some people, the perceived lack of solidarity was just as pronounced. We conclude that despite frequent mobilisations of solidarity by policy makers and other public actors, actual practices of solidarity are poorly understood—despite the importance of solidarity for public health and policy.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

了解大流行病的团结：英国第一次 COVID-19 封锁期间的相互支持

在 COVID-19 大流行的整个过程中，团结的概念经常被引用。人们的兴趣主要集中在公民和社区如何在不确定时期相互支持。然而，能够说明和理解公民对大流行病团结的看法或他们的实际做法的实证研究仍然有限。本文通过对 35 个定性访谈的数据分析，调查了英格兰和苏格兰的居民在 2020 年 4 月英国首次全国封锁期间是如何实施、理解或批评（缺乏）团结的--当时媒体将团结推向了前所未有的高潮。研究发现，尽管一些人践行了团结精神，但人们对缺乏团结精神的看法也同样明显。我们的结论是，尽管政策制定者和其他公共参与者经常动员人们团结一致，但人们对团结一致的实际做法了解甚少，尽管团结一致对公共卫生和政策非常重要。

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

Public Health Ethics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-MEDICAL ETHICS

CiteScore

3.10

自引率

9.50%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Public Health Ethics invites submission of papers on any topic that is relevant for ethical reflection about public health practice and theory. Our aim is to publish readable papers of high scientific quality which will stimulate debate and discussion about ethical issues relating to all aspects of public health. Our main criteria for grading manuscripts include originality and potential impact, quality of philosophical analysis, and relevance to debates in public health ethics and practice. Manuscripts are accepted for publication on the understanding that they have been submitted solely to Public Health Ethics and that they have not been previously published either in whole or in part. Authors may not submit papers that are under consideration for publication elsewhere, and, if an author decides to offer a submitted paper to another journal, the paper must be withdrawn from Public Health Ethics before the new submission is made. The editorial office will make every effort to deal with submissions to the journal as quickly as possible. All papers will be acknowledged on receipt by email and will receive preliminary editorial review within 2 weeks. Papers of high interest will be sent out for external review. Authors will normally be notified of acceptance, rejection, or need for revision within 8 weeks of submission. Contributors will be provided with electronic access to their proof via email; corrections should be returned within 48 hours.