BMC Medical Ethics 23 (1):1-14 (2022)

Authors
Hazem Zohny
University of Otago
Dominic Wilkinson
Oxford University
1 more
Abstract
BackgroundIn the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, many health systems, including those in the UK, developed triage guidelines to manage severe shortages of ventilators. At present, there is an insufficient understanding of how the public views these guidelines, and little evidence on which features of a patient the public believe should and should not be considered in ventilator triage.MethodsTwo surveys were conducted with representative UK samples. In the first survey, 525 participants were asked in an open-ended format to provide features they thought should and should not be considered in allocating ventilators for COVID-19 patients when not enough ventilators are available. In the second survey, 505 participants were presented with 30 features identified from the first study, and were asked if these features should count in favour of a patient with the feature getting a ventilator, count against the patient, or neither. Statistical tests were conducted to determine if a feature was generally considered by participants as morally relevant and whether its mean was non-neutral.ResultsIn Survey 1, the features of a patient most frequently cited as being morally relevant to determining who would receive access to ventilators were age, general health, prospect of recovery, having dependents, and the severity of COVID symptoms. The features most frequently cited as being morally irrelevant to determining who would receive access to ventilators are race, gender, economic status, religion, social status, age, sexual orientation, and career. In Survey 2, the top three features that participants thought should count in favour of receiving a ventilator were pregnancy, having a chance of dying soon, and having waited for a long time. The top three features that participants thought should count against a patient receiving a ventilator were having committed violent crimes in the past, having unnecessarily engaged in activities with a high risk of COVID-19 infection, and a low chance of survival.ConclusionsThe public generally agreed with existing UK guidelines that allocate ventilators according to medical benefits and that aim to avoid discrimination based on demographic features such as race and gender. However, many participants expressed potentially non-utilitarian concerns, such as inclining to deprioritise ventilator allocation to those who had a criminal history or who contracted the virus by needlessly engaging in high-risk activities.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1186/s12910-022-00773-0
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,231
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Concept of Desert in Distributive Justice.Julian Lamont - 1994 - Philosophical Quarterly 44 (174):45-64.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Morally Relevant Features.Bernard Gert - 1999 - Metaphilosophy 30 (1&2):13-24.
The Ethical Unjustifications of COVID-19 Triage Committees.Yi Jiao Tian - 2021 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 18 (4):621-628.
Attending to Morally Relevant Features.Heather J. Gert - 2013 - Teaching Ethics 14 (1):51-69.
Rules and Exceptions.Johan Brannmark - 1999 - Theoria 65 (2-3):127-143.
Are Patients Morally Responsible for Their Errors?S. Buetow - 2006 - Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (5):260-262.
Withdrawing Critical Care From Patients in a Triage Situation.Joseph Tham, Louis Melahn & Michael Baggot - 2021 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 24 (2):205-211.
To Lie or to Mislead?Felix Timmermann & Emanuel Viebahn - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 178 (5):1481-1501.
Extraordinary Means and Intensive Care.Joan Glick - 2016 - Ethics and Medics 41 (1):1-4.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2022-03-26

Total views
5 ( #1,207,394 of 2,518,444 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #137,762 of 2,518,444 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes