悲剧性的选择,重新审视:COVID-19和配给的隐藏伦理

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 N/A PHILOSOPHY Christian Bioethics Pub Date : 2022-03-18 DOI:10.1093/cb/cbab019
M. Ryan
{"title":"悲剧性的选择,重新审视:COVID-19和配给的隐藏伦理","authors":"M. Ryan","doi":"10.1093/cb/cbab019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Early in the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, concern that there could be a shortage of ventilators raised the possibility of rationing care. Denying patients life-saving care captures our moral imagination, prompting the demand for a defensible framework of ethical principles for determining who will live and who will die. Behind the moral dilemma posed by the shortage of a particular medical good lies a broad moral geography encompassing important and often unarticulated societal values, as well as assumptions about the nature and purpose of health care and the consequences of long-standing choices about health care as a social good. This article explores what COVID-19 has exposed concerning values and choices around health care in the United States. Employing the lens of Catholic Social Thought, it argues for an approach to rationing that is grounded in respect for human dignity, committed to distributing social goods in light of the common good, and self-conscious about the construction of vulnerability to illness and death.","PeriodicalId":42894,"journal":{"name":"Christian Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tragic Choices, Revisited: COVID-19 and the Hidden Ethics of Rationing\",\"authors\":\"M. Ryan\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/cb/cbab019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Early in the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, concern that there could be a shortage of ventilators raised the possibility of rationing care. Denying patients life-saving care captures our moral imagination, prompting the demand for a defensible framework of ethical principles for determining who will live and who will die. Behind the moral dilemma posed by the shortage of a particular medical good lies a broad moral geography encompassing important and often unarticulated societal values, as well as assumptions about the nature and purpose of health care and the consequences of long-standing choices about health care as a social good. This article explores what COVID-19 has exposed concerning values and choices around health care in the United States. Employing the lens of Catholic Social Thought, it argues for an approach to rationing that is grounded in respect for human dignity, committed to distributing social goods in light of the common good, and self-conscious about the construction of vulnerability to illness and death.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Christian Bioethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Christian Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbab019\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Christian Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbab019","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

摘要在美国新冠肺炎大流行的早期,对呼吸机短缺的担忧增加了定量护理的可能性。拒绝为患者提供挽救生命的护理抓住了我们的道德想象力,促使我们需要一个可辩护的道德原则框架来决定谁活谁死。在特定医疗产品短缺造成的道德困境背后,隐藏着一个广泛的道德地理,包括重要且往往无法表述的社会价值观,以及对医疗保健的性质和目的的假设,以及长期以来对医疗保健作为社会产品的选择的后果。这篇文章探讨了新冠肺炎暴露了美国医疗保健的价值观和选择。运用天主教社会思想的视角,它主张采取一种基于尊重人类尊严的配给方法,致力于根据共同利益分配社会商品,并自觉构建易受疾病和死亡影响的结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Tragic Choices, Revisited: COVID-19 and the Hidden Ethics of Rationing
Abstract Early in the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, concern that there could be a shortage of ventilators raised the possibility of rationing care. Denying patients life-saving care captures our moral imagination, prompting the demand for a defensible framework of ethical principles for determining who will live and who will die. Behind the moral dilemma posed by the shortage of a particular medical good lies a broad moral geography encompassing important and often unarticulated societal values, as well as assumptions about the nature and purpose of health care and the consequences of long-standing choices about health care as a social good. This article explores what COVID-19 has exposed concerning values and choices around health care in the United States. Employing the lens of Catholic Social Thought, it argues for an approach to rationing that is grounded in respect for human dignity, committed to distributing social goods in light of the common good, and self-conscious about the construction of vulnerability to illness and death.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Uncertainty, Risk, and the Need for Trust in Our Hope for Health Inhumation as Theophanic Encounter: The Eastern Orthodox Rejection of Cremation Ectopic Pregnancy as Previable Delivery Artificial Wombs: Could They Deliver an Answer to the Problem of Frozen Embryos? Ectogestation and Humanity’s Whence? An Exploration with Saint Augustine and Karl Barth
×
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