Ethical Considerations During the COVID-19 Pandemic

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Situational Analysis
Ethical Issues Produced by the Widespread the Virus
Resolving the Dilemma: Medical Choice Recommendations
Conclusion
References

Introduction

The health care sector is an exceptionally challenging field in regards to decision-making, requiring thorough and careful choices. Applying acceptable ethical practices is a necessary part of a clinical professionals job, demanding extensive examination through theoretical and practical approaches. The recent widespread of the COVID-19 virus has put tremendous pressure on the health care workers, producing multiple issues connected to ethical conduct, legal justifications, and regulatory practices. Due to the lack of necessary resources, such complications as prioritization of community members and professional responsibility have arisen, necessitating a plausible resolution. In this paper, the ethical issue of resource scarceness will be discussed in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the decision to sustain populations with life-threatening symptoms will be examined.

Situational Analysis

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic throughout the world is undoubtedly the most significant health crisis in recent history. The nature of this epidemic had an unprecedented impact on both the livelihood of people worldwide and the health care sectors of multiple nations. Following the severity of COVID-19 and its threat to humankind, the World Health Organization (WHO) presented a declaration deeming the virus a global pandemic (Jebril, 2019). Thousands of cases were reported in more than 100 countries, anticipating an acceleration in the escalation rate and demanding stringent measures to curb the pandemic. Despite the various efforts to prevent the spread of the virus, infection cases continue to rise as each day comes with newly disclosed cases of infections and loss of life due to the epidemic.

Ethical Issues Produced by the Widespread the Virus

Any health care emergency creates a significant risk for specific populations. Some scholars have outlined pertinent moral complications intimately connected with the difficulties of diagnosing and treating the disease described, mainly the ethical challenges concerning resource availability (Kaplan, 2020). As reported by Kramer et al. (2020), an urgent predicament in need of discussion is the prioritization of individual community members to be screened and tested for COVID-19. According to the primary principles of ethical decision-making, it is imperative to uphold the patients equity, presenting all citizens with opportunities necessary for successful recovery (Jeffrey, 2020). However, as demanded materials become scarce, the health care workers are compelled to make a choice in favor of the endangered population. Altogether, as specific communities become prioritized, people who are susceptible to different medical conditions may be confronted with a lack of professional care.

From a legal standpoint, resource administration becomes an even more demanding obstacle to equal treatment delivery. The law distinguishes between certain scenarios where it is possible to reassign specific medical equipment from one person to another if the latter will potentially benefit from reallocation (Kaplan, 2020). Nevertheless, it is still unclear how the process of such transfer should be legally justified, as medical resolutions are often made during urgent situations requiring quick judgment (Chew & Ko, 2020). Several scholars debate if a doctor who reassigned a ventilating system should be responsible for respiratory complications or if it should be allowed by the law to redistribute such resources to populations at risk (American Medical Association [AMA], 2020; Kaplan, 2020). Even though the current justice regulations allow for scarce materials to be transferred between patients, specific legal elements of such allocations remain unclear.

Another noteworthy problem for this discussion concerns the regulatory issues created. Given the decreased availability of vital supplies, it is necessary to implement efficient resource regulation systems, producing an accounting method for the materials used. From the regulatory perspective, insufficient supplies and services should be documented and distributed accordingly, depending on the situational characteristics (Baines et al., 2020). Although some regulations have been relaxed or temporarily disabled in several countries, such a lack of management can potentially result in grievous outcomes (Kramer et al., 2020). Thus, the officials are forced to decide whether it is advantageous to add new resource control policies which will ensure just distribution but lower the treatment rates.

Examining all of the discussed complications, the American Medical Association has presented a solution that considers patient and health care professionals needs. According to the released guidelines, clinicians can reassign certain medications and technical devices, judging the severity of the affected patients condition caused by the COVID-19 virus (AMA, 2020). The physicians are to allocate materials based on the likelihood of benefit, meaning that a client with a higher possibility of recovery will receive treatment when compared to a chronically ill individual. Such redistribution is now considered ethical, allowing medical professionals to legally transfer clinical resources and follow specific regulations when presented with ambiguous situations.

Resolving the Dilemma: Medical Choice Recommendations

Various ethical considerations and underlying factors have to be considered to effectively respond to the distribution dilemma in the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the WHO (2021) report on resource allocation and priority setting, an adequate ethical framework must consider the pandemics unique nature, context, and stage. For instance, the most vulnerable people, as indicated by the WHO (2021) statistics on the COVID-19 pandemic, are adults aged 60 years or older. Therefore, this factor has to be considered in shaping resource assignment preferences and pandemic control measures. Baines et al. (2020) emphasize that the communitys interest takes precedence over individual benefits, suggesting that public-focused ethics would be more appropriate in this situation. With this in mind, the elderly should be given priority when it comes to resource allocation in regard to ICU spaces, ventilators, and vaccination.

Considering the legal perspective of this issue, it is possible to attempt to distinguish between finite and nonfinite resources, allowing medical professionals to make more weighted decisions. It is recommended that potential scenarios and ambiguous situations be regulated on the jurisdictional level, providing the health care workers with sufficient information on how to act under specific circumstances (Kramer et al., 2020). Ethical and legal justifications should be combined when devising such guidelines, considering the patient equity and malpractice responsibilities.

The regulatory system would largely benefit from the creation of adjusted directives that cover the use and distribution of nonfinite resources. According to some researchers, it is necessary to increase control over scarce materials, avoiding the relaxation of existing instructions (Kaplan, 2020). Although it would seem essential to engage in practices that offer more freedom of decision, it is crucial to remember that control over sparse resources can exceptionally increase the situations stability. Obtaining firm and understandable principles of conduct will benefit both the governmental authorities and the medical professionals.

Conclusion

To conclude, the COVID-19 pandemic and the health care system issues linked to resource allocation were discussed in detail in this paper. The ongoing epidemic circumstances present several ethical, legal, and regulatory dilemmas that necessitate creating an informed approach that will follow the moral guidelines and benefit all the parties involved. Multiple scholarly studies and discussions report the difficulties with upholding standards of equity, legal responsibility, and proper regulation given the challenging nature of the COVID-19 widespread and its impact on healthcare workers. Considering the circumstances discussed, it appears necessary to apply public health ethics, focusing on populations susceptible to the virus, and improve the current legal and regulatory guidelines. Producing a clear and coherent system encompassing principles of medical conduct can significantly increase the possibility of positive outcomes for both the nations citizens and the institutions authorities.

References

American Medical Association. (2020) Access and health equity during a pandemic. Web.

Baines, P., Draper, H., Chiumento, A., Fovargue, S., & Frith, L. (2020). COVID-19 and beyond: The ethical challenges of resetting health services during and after public health emergencies. Journal of Medical Ethics, 46(11), 715716. Web.

Chew, C., & Ko, D. (2020). Medical ethics in the era of COVID-19: Now and the future. Respirology, 25(10), 10331034. Web.

Jebril, N. M. (2020). World Health Organization declared a pandemic public health menace: A systematic review of the coronavirus disease 2019 COVID-19. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(9), 2784-2795. Web.

Jeffrey, D. I. (2020). Relational ethical approaches to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Medical Ethics, 46(8), 495498. Web.

Hoff, T. (2020). Ethics Talk Podcast TranscriptDisability Community Perspectives on COVID-19. [Audio podcast]. AMA Journal of Ethics. Web.

Kaplan, B. (2020). Revisiting health information technology ethical, legal, and social issues and evaluation: Telehealth/telemedicine and COVID-19. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 143(2020), 1-16. Web.

Kramer, J. B., Brown, D. E., & Kopar, P. K. (2020). Ethics in the time of coronavirus: Recommendations in the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 230(6), 11141118. Web.

McGuire, A. L., Aulisio, M. P., Davis, F. D., Erwin, C., Harter, T. D., Jagsi, R., Klitzman, R., Macauley, R., Racine, E., Wolf, S. M., Wynia, M., Wolpe, P. R., & The COVID-19 Task Force of the Association of Bioethics Program Directors (ABPD). (2020). Ethical challenges arising in the COVID-19 pandemic: An overview from the Association of Bioethics Program Directors (ABPD) task force. The American Journal of Bioethics, 20(7), 15-27. Web.

World Health Organization. (2020). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Ethics, resource allocation and priority setting. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!