Abstract
AbstractCommentaries on the ethics of Covid lockdowns nearly all focus on offering substantive guidance to policy‐makers. Lockdowns, however, raise many ethical questions that admit of a range of reasonable answers. In such cases, policy‐making in a liberal democracy ought to be sensitive to which reasonable views the public actually holds—a topic existing bioethical work on lockdowns has not explored in detail. In this essay, I identify several important questions connected to the kind of influence the public ought to have on lockdown decision‐making, including how policy‐makers ought to handle misinformed or morally suspect viewpoints, and how policy‐makers ought to respond to minority viewpoints. I argue that questions like this, concerning the appropriate influence of the public on decision‐making, will be central to the field of bioethics as it increasingly focuses on policy and population‐level issues and therefore ought to be priorities for future work.
Funder
American Council of Learned Societies
Subject
Health Policy,Philosophy,Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science),Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering,Environmental Engineering
Reference33 articles.
1. Risk Trade‐Offs and Equitable Decision‐Making in the Covid‐19 Pandemic
2. Well-Being and Fair DistributionBeyond Cost-Benefit Analysis
3. C. R.Sunstein “This Time the Numbers Show We Can't Be Too Careful ”Bloomberg Opinion March 26 2020.
4. P.SingerandM.Plant “When Will the Pandemic Cure Be Worse Than the Disease? ”Project Syndicate April 6 2020 https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/when-will-lockdowns-be-worse-than-covid19-by-peter-singer-and-michael-plant-2020-04.
5. Costa, cancer and coronavirus: contractualism as a guide to the ethics of lockdown