Distributive justice and the harm to medical professionals fighting epidemics
The exposure of doctors, nurses and other medical professionals to risks in the context of epidemics is significant. While traditional medical ethics offers the thought that these dangers may limit the extent to which a duty to care is applicable in such situations, it has less to say about what we...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of medical ethics 2017-12, Vol.43 (12), p.861-864 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 864 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 12 |
| container_start_page | 861 |
| container_title | Journal of medical ethics |
| container_volume | 43 |
| creator | Albertsen, Andreas Thaysen, Jens Damgaard Albertsen, Andreas |
| description | The exposure of doctors, nurses and other medical professionals to risks in the context of epidemics is significant. While traditional medical ethics offers the thought that these dangers may limit the extent to which a duty to care is applicable in such situations, it has less to say about what we might owe to medical professionals who are disadvantaged in these contexts. Luck egalitarianism, a responsibility-sensitive theory of distributive justice, appears to fare particularly badly in that regard. If we want to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their decisions to help, cure and care for the vulnerable, luck egalitarianism seems to imply that their claim of justice to medical attention in case of infection is weak or non-existent. The article demonstrates how a recent interpretation of luck egalitarianism offers a solution to this problem. Redefining luck egalitarianism as concerned with responsibility for creating disadvantages, rather than for incurring disadvantage as such, makes it possible to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their choices and that those infected because of their choice to help fight epidemics have a full claim of justice to medical attention. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1136/medethics-2017-104196 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1923112553</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A524739193</galeid><jstor_id>26879636</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A524739193</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b485t-727bde617ceb99108e5cbab71828a3f7c09cfee369b6557942c078098dbd80a13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtv1DAUhS1ERaeFn1AUiQ2bUD_i17IanlKrbsrasp2bGUdJPMQOKv8eRylFYoU3Xpzvnnt0D0JXBH8ghInrEVrIx-BTTTGRNcEN0eIF2pFGsrqhXL5EO8ywqIXC-BxdpNTj8qjSr9A5VZJpweQO3X0MKc_BLTn8hKpfUg4eKju1VT5CdbTzWOVYlWXB26E6zbGDlEKc7JCqLhyOOUyHCk6hhbFkeY3OuqLAm6f_En3__Olh_7W-vf_ybX9zW7tG8VxLKl0LgkgPTmuCFXDvrJNEUWVZJz3WvgNgQjvBudQN9VgqrFXrWoUtYZfo_eZbAv1YIGUzhuRhGOwEcUmGaMoIoZyzgr77B-3jMq_5CyWxpg3FtFD1Rh3sACZMPk4ZHrOPwwAHMCX8_t7ccFqOq4leXfnG-zmmNENnTnMY7fzLEGzWfsxzP2btx2z9lLm3T2kWV4jnqT-FFOBqA_qU4_xXF0oWfTXAm-7G_j93_gYLfqYd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1970924202</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Distributive justice and the harm to medical professionals fighting epidemics</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Albertsen, Andreas ; Thaysen, Jens Damgaard ; Albertsen, Andreas</creator><creatorcontrib>Albertsen, Andreas ; Thaysen, Jens Damgaard ; Albertsen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><description>The exposure of doctors, nurses and other medical professionals to risks in the context of epidemics is significant. While traditional medical ethics offers the thought that these dangers may limit the extent to which a duty to care is applicable in such situations, it has less to say about what we might owe to medical professionals who are disadvantaged in these contexts. Luck egalitarianism, a responsibility-sensitive theory of distributive justice, appears to fare particularly badly in that regard. If we want to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their decisions to help, cure and care for the vulnerable, luck egalitarianism seems to imply that their claim of justice to medical attention in case of infection is weak or non-existent. The article demonstrates how a recent interpretation of luck egalitarianism offers a solution to this problem. Redefining luck egalitarianism as concerned with responsibility for creating disadvantages, rather than for incurring disadvantage as such, makes it possible to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their choices and that those infected because of their choice to help fight epidemics have a full claim of justice to medical attention.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0306-6800</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1473-4257</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104196</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28739637</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ</publisher><subject>Bioethics ; Choice Behavior ; Delivery of Health Care ; Distributive justice ; Ebola virus ; Egalitarianism ; Epidemics ; Ethics ; Evaluation ; Health Behavior ; Health Care Rationing - ethics ; Health Personnel ; Helping Behavior ; Humans ; Infection - epidemiology ; Infection - therapy ; Infection - transmission ; Infections ; Medical ethics ; Medical personnel ; Nurses ; Occupational Exposure ; Prevention ; Public health ; Public health administration ; Safety and security measures ; Social Justice</subject><ispartof>Journal of medical ethics, 2017-12, Vol.43 (12), p.861-864</ispartof><rights>Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.</rights><rights>Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017</rights><rights>Copyright: 2017 © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b485t-727bde617ceb99108e5cbab71828a3f7c09cfee369b6557942c078098dbd80a13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b485t-727bde617ceb99108e5cbab71828a3f7c09cfee369b6557942c078098dbd80a13</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7528-2493</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26879636$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26879636$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27903,27904,57995,58228</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28739637$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Albertsen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thaysen, Jens Damgaard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albertsen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><title>Distributive justice and the harm to medical professionals fighting epidemics</title><title>Journal of medical ethics</title><addtitle>J Med Ethics</addtitle><description>The exposure of doctors, nurses and other medical professionals to risks in the context of epidemics is significant. While traditional medical ethics offers the thought that these dangers may limit the extent to which a duty to care is applicable in such situations, it has less to say about what we might owe to medical professionals who are disadvantaged in these contexts. Luck egalitarianism, a responsibility-sensitive theory of distributive justice, appears to fare particularly badly in that regard. If we want to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their decisions to help, cure and care for the vulnerable, luck egalitarianism seems to imply that their claim of justice to medical attention in case of infection is weak or non-existent. The article demonstrates how a recent interpretation of luck egalitarianism offers a solution to this problem. Redefining luck egalitarianism as concerned with responsibility for creating disadvantages, rather than for incurring disadvantage as such, makes it possible to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their choices and that those infected because of their choice to help fight epidemics have a full claim of justice to medical attention.</description><subject>Bioethics</subject><subject>Choice Behavior</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care</subject><subject>Distributive justice</subject><subject>Ebola virus</subject><subject>Egalitarianism</subject><subject>Epidemics</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Health Behavior</subject><subject>Health Care Rationing - ethics</subject><subject>Health Personnel</subject><subject>Helping Behavior</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infection - epidemiology</subject><subject>Infection - therapy</subject><subject>Infection - transmission</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Medical ethics</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Occupational Exposure</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Public health administration</subject><subject>Safety and security measures</subject><subject>Social Justice</subject><issn>0306-6800</issn><issn>1473-4257</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtv1DAUhS1ERaeFn1AUiQ2bUD_i17IanlKrbsrasp2bGUdJPMQOKv8eRylFYoU3Xpzvnnt0D0JXBH8ghInrEVrIx-BTTTGRNcEN0eIF2pFGsrqhXL5EO8ywqIXC-BxdpNTj8qjSr9A5VZJpweQO3X0MKc_BLTn8hKpfUg4eKju1VT5CdbTzWOVYlWXB26E6zbGDlEKc7JCqLhyOOUyHCk6hhbFkeY3OuqLAm6f_En3__Olh_7W-vf_ybX9zW7tG8VxLKl0LgkgPTmuCFXDvrJNEUWVZJz3WvgNgQjvBudQN9VgqrFXrWoUtYZfo_eZbAv1YIGUzhuRhGOwEcUmGaMoIoZyzgr77B-3jMq_5CyWxpg3FtFD1Rh3sACZMPk4ZHrOPwwAHMCX8_t7ccFqOq4leXfnG-zmmNENnTnMY7fzLEGzWfsxzP2btx2z9lLm3T2kWV4jnqT-FFOBqA_qU4_xXF0oWfTXAm-7G_j93_gYLfqYd</recordid><startdate>201712</startdate><enddate>201712</enddate><creator>Albertsen, Andreas</creator><creator>Thaysen, Jens Damgaard</creator><creator>Albertsen, Andreas</creator><general>BMJ</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7528-2493</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201712</creationdate><title>Distributive justice and the harm to medical professionals fighting epidemics</title><author>Albertsen, Andreas ; Thaysen, Jens Damgaard ; Albertsen, Andreas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b485t-727bde617ceb99108e5cbab71828a3f7c09cfee369b6557942c078098dbd80a13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Bioethics</topic><topic>Choice Behavior</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care</topic><topic>Distributive justice</topic><topic>Ebola virus</topic><topic>Egalitarianism</topic><topic>Epidemics</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Health Behavior</topic><topic>Health Care Rationing - ethics</topic><topic>Health Personnel</topic><topic>Helping Behavior</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infection - epidemiology</topic><topic>Infection - therapy</topic><topic>Infection - transmission</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Medical ethics</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Occupational Exposure</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Public health administration</topic><topic>Safety and security measures</topic><topic>Social Justice</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Albertsen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thaysen, Jens Damgaard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albertsen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of medical ethics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Albertsen, Andreas</au><au>Thaysen, Jens Damgaard</au><au>Albertsen, Andreas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Distributive justice and the harm to medical professionals fighting epidemics</atitle><jtitle>Journal of medical ethics</jtitle><addtitle>J Med Ethics</addtitle><date>2017-12</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>861</spage><epage>864</epage><pages>861-864</pages><issn>0306-6800</issn><eissn>1473-4257</eissn><abstract>The exposure of doctors, nurses and other medical professionals to risks in the context of epidemics is significant. While traditional medical ethics offers the thought that these dangers may limit the extent to which a duty to care is applicable in such situations, it has less to say about what we might owe to medical professionals who are disadvantaged in these contexts. Luck egalitarianism, a responsibility-sensitive theory of distributive justice, appears to fare particularly badly in that regard. If we want to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their decisions to help, cure and care for the vulnerable, luck egalitarianism seems to imply that their claim of justice to medical attention in case of infection is weak or non-existent. The article demonstrates how a recent interpretation of luck egalitarianism offers a solution to this problem. Redefining luck egalitarianism as concerned with responsibility for creating disadvantages, rather than for incurring disadvantage as such, makes it possible to maintain that medical professionals are responsible for their choices and that those infected because of their choice to help fight epidemics have a full claim of justice to medical attention.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ</pub><pmid>28739637</pmid><doi>10.1136/medethics-2017-104196</doi><tpages>4</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7528-2493</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0306-6800 |
| ispartof | Journal of medical ethics, 2017-12, Vol.43 (12), p.861-864 |
| issn | 0306-6800 1473-4257 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1923112553 |
| source | Jstor Complete Legacy; MEDLINE |
| subjects | Bioethics Choice Behavior Delivery of Health Care Distributive justice Ebola virus Egalitarianism Epidemics Ethics Evaluation Health Behavior Health Care Rationing - ethics Health Personnel Helping Behavior Humans Infection - epidemiology Infection - therapy Infection - transmission Infections Medical ethics Medical personnel Nurses Occupational Exposure Prevention Public health Public health administration Safety and security measures Social Justice |
| title | Distributive justice and the harm to medical professionals fighting epidemics |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T15%3A58%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Distributive%20justice%20and%20the%20harm%20to%20medical%20professionals%20fighting%20epidemics&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20medical%20ethics&rft.au=Albertsen,%20Andreas&rft.date=2017-12&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=861&rft.epage=864&rft.pages=861-864&rft.issn=0306-6800&rft.eissn=1473-4257&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/medethics-2017-104196&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA524739193%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1970924202&rft_id=info:pmid/28739637&rft_galeid=A524739193&rft_jstor_id=26879636&rfr_iscdi=true |