I listened to the debate on BBC Radio 4’s, the Global Philosopher this morning on Pandemic Ethics. Michael Sandel is a great leader of debates and prompts participants to give interesting answers.
Is stockpiling food unethical? Should prices be regulated for scarce goods? Should preference be given to loyal customers?
Thought-provoking questions. It is interesting listening to people defend open markets as a way of distributing scarce resources. A premium service for those who can afford to pay more sounds a bit like private healthcare. Stockpiling to protect your family was justified on the grounds that everyone else would do it, so why not get in first?
What about monitoring people’s movements and enforcing staying at home? In China neighbours were encouraged to inform on those who were ignoring the restrictions on movement. In a global pandemic can you have local rules to restrict movement? Can you treat potentially infected people who appear on our streets like someone carrying a gun?
In overcrowded hospitals should they choose to treat those with the best chance of survival first? Or should it be first come first served?
In a scenario where an elderly patient is already on a ventilator, and a younger person arrives who needs a ventilator, would you take the ventilator off the elderly person? How do you decide whose life is more important? What if it was a doctor or nurse who needed the ventilator?
Options for selecting who got treated were summarised as:
- first come first served (chance)
- chance of survival (age)
- the social contribution of the patient
The best solution offered was for people to stay home, wash their hands frequently and reduce the burden on health services. That and make every effort to increase resources to test for and treat the virus.
odespinner 