Ethical challenges for school nurses during COVID-19

School nurses balance ethical challenges with the moral responsibility to students and the public health of the school community during a global pandemic. This balance reveals the critical role of the school nurse. We encourage school nurses to harness lessons learned during this pandemic to make proactive changes and eliminate structures that did not support practice. School nurses must use their voices and demand change;school systems have a moral responsibility to all stakeholders. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022. All rights reserved.

COVID-19 and the Care of the Financialized Self

In the United States, the threat of COVID-19 as a public health problem was impossible to separate from the financial threat. From the start, the virus's circulation through human bodies intermingled with all the ways human lives had been defined by neoliberalism's economizing rationality. To unpack the convergence of the pandemic with neoliberal rationality, this article examines the financial advisory discourse produced by credit and fintech companies at the start of the pandemic, focusing on Equifax, Experian, and Mint. This messaging was replete with expressions of care, along with promises of institutional assistance. However, reading further it became clear the companies offered mostly financial self-help advice. The immediate turn to this type of messaging suggested how much the financial system depended on a collective continuation of the individual's sense of moral responsibility for financial self-management and creditworthiness, and especially diligent debt-payment.Alternate :Aux États-Unis la menace de la COVID-19 comme problème de santé publique était indissociable de la menace financière. Dès le début de la pandémie, la circulation du virus dans les corps humains s'est interposée avec toutes les façons dont les vies humaines ont été définies par la rationalité économisante du néolibéralisme. Pour éclaircir la convergence de la pandémie avec la rationalité néolibérale, le présent article examine les messages d'avis financiers produits par les entreprises de crédit et de technologie financière pendant la pandémie, notamment Equifax, Experian et Mint. Ces messages étaient emplis d'expression de soutien, avec des promesses d'aide institutionnelle. Cependant, une lecture plus attentive permet de voir que ces entreprises ont surtout offert des conseils visant l'auto-assistance financière. Le recours immédiat à ce type de message indique le degré auquel le système financier dépend sur la continuation collective du sens de responsabilité morale des personnes pour gérer eux-mêmes leurs finances et leur capacité de crédit, et particulièrement pour continuer à payer leurs dettes.

Accepting Moral Luck and Taking Responsibility in Public Health Crises.

We see cases of moral luck arising in recent times, as we face the uncertainties of provisional rules for navigating the coronavirus pandemic. How should we respond to rule-breakers, and how should they view themselves, when they cause harm inadvertently? Although some argue that guilt is unnecessary for any harm that may result from luck, this paper takes moral luck seriously and encourages consideration of the benefits to be achieved by expressions of self-blame amidst troubling circumstances, from pure accidents to how we live during pandemics. It argues that rule-breakers in public health crises show us the importance of taking responsibility for our actions.

Pandemic Rule-Breakers, Moral Luck, and Blaming the Blameworthy.

This paper takes under consideration a piece by Roger Crisp in which he questions what the problem of moral luck can teach us about COVID-19 lockdown rule-breakers. Taking the position that although such rule-breakers might seem to be new examples of moral luck, Crisp ends up denying the existence of moral luck and argues that moral luck is an outdated notion in so far as it relies on other questionable aspects of morality, that is, retributivist punishment and blame. Although the author agrees with Crisp that pandemic rule-breaker cases are putative examples of resultant moral luck, he proposes that Crisp has misconstrued what moral luck is and the paper examines in detail what he sees as the numerous problems with Crisp's claims. The author concludes that Crisp's analysis of pandemic rule-breaking does not shed any new light on the moral luck debate, and the difficult questions of luck, moral responsibility, and desert are not so easily resolved.

Covid-19 Care Circuits: The Chinese Transnational State, Its Diaspora, and Beyond

This paper examines the notions, politics, and practice of care that have characterised the transnational Chinese state during the Covid-19 pandemic. Drawing on policy and media analyses, participant observation, and qualitative interviews with 21 Chinese people in the Netherlands, the paper maps out three care circuits: from the diaspora to China, from China to the diaspora, and from China to the world. The findings show how the pandemic has offered a stage for emotional ties, patriotism, and moral responsibility to be played out, cultivated, and contested. These in turn have an impact on the economic and political agendas of the transnational Chinese state.

Vulnerability, Moral responsibility, and Moral Obligations: the case of Industrial Action in the Medical and Allied Professions.

The article addresses issues at the nexus of physician industrial action, moral agency, and responsibility. There are situations in which we find ourselves best placed to offer aid to those who may be in vulnerable positions, a behavior that is consistent with our everyday moral intuitions. In both our interpersonal relationships and social life, we make frequent judgments about whether to praise or blame someone for their actions when we determine that they should have acted to help a vulnerable person. While the average person is unlikely to confront these kinds of situations often, those in the medical professions, physicians especially, may confront these and similar situations regularly. Therefore, when physicians withhold their services for whatever reason in support of industrial action, it raises issues of moral responsibility to patients who may be in a vulnerable position. Using theories of moral responsibility, vulnerability, and ethics, this paper explores the moral implications of physician industrial action. We explore issues of vulnerability of patients, as well as the moral responsibility and moral agency of doctors to patients. Determining when a person is vulnerable, and when an individual becomes a moral agent, worthy of praise or blame for an act or non-action, is at the core of the framework. Notwithstanding the right of physicians to act in their self-interest, we argue that vulnerability leads to moral obligations, that physicians are moral agents, and the imperatives of their obligations to patients clear, even if limited by certain conditions. We suggest that both doctors and governments have a collective responsibility to prevent harm to patients and present the theoretical and practical implications of the paper.

Community in the Age of the Pandemic: Moral Responsibility in light of Covid-Uncertaintity

А situation of COVID uncertainty resulting in the destruction of the conventional forms of interaction led to a reformatted social context and challenged a possibility of a morally responsible attitude towards the Other in the conditions of separateness, distancing and isolation. Understanding morality as an ambivalent phenomenon that acts both as a social institution and as a self-legislation of a moral agent, allows for singling out two aspects of a moral responsibility: a measure of what is due towards other people, which is established by a moral agent himself, and duties imposed upon the moral agent from the outside. In this case, a normative adequacy of the moral agent is manifested in his power of social prediction and his ability to bear responsibility for the future state of the community, which becomes of a paramount importance in light of the pandemic. In the current situation, a moral responsibility is a mutual responsibility of an individual and the state where these both parties act as moral agents: the state is responsible for the comprehensive exercise of human rights and freedoms, provision of decent living conditions and security, and protection of health as well as for the quality of its own decisions, their implementation and social impact;whilst an individual is responsible for his own decisions and actions, which in the state of emergency are dedicated to the cause of collective well-being and aimed at minimization of the harm and prevention of the sufferings of others. A specific tension preconditioned by a dilemma of a personal freedom and collective goals to preserve health and survive, may be eased with the help of a dialogue, trust and reflexivity that would help get over the increasing distancing and separateness. © 2022, Russian Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Causation comes in degrees.

Which country, politician, or policy is more of a cause of the Covid-19 pandemic death toll? Which of the two factories causally contributed more to the pollution of the nearby river? A wide-ranging portion of our everyday thought and talk, and attitudes rely on a graded notion of causation. However, it is sometimes highlighted that on most contemporary accounts, causation is on-off. Some philosophers further question the legitimacy of talk of degrees of causation and suggest that we avoid it. Some hold that the notion of degrees of causation is an illusion. In this paper, I'll argue that causation does come in degrees.

The change in the concept of virtue during the COVID-19 pandemic

The purpose of the article is to cover the change in the concept of virtue during the COVID-19 pandemic, show its connection with human values and ethics. Virtue is the highest spiritual quality of a person. The main virtues include wisdom. courage, justice. moderation, responsiveness, loyalty, modesty, generosity and many others that affect all aspects of human life. Despite the recognized value of virtue as a system of moral guidelines. its concept is fraught with disputes about whether it is really generally valid. as well as about the problem of the effectiveness of virtue as a universal guideline and criterion for moral choice and its relevance in modern moral experience. This article argues that the most significant shift in the concept of virtue during the pandemic was the rethinking and increased awareness of the importance of such virtues as solidarity and moral responsibility, as well as aspects of relationships with people such as kindness, compassion, and empathy. It is proved that the concept of virtue has moved from a question of choice to the category of necessity. the most important guideline and guarantee of the common good.

The moral responsibility of governments and individuals in the context of the coronavirus pandemic.

AIM: Not only is the coronavirus pandemic about science and facts, it also raises a number of ethical questions. Some of the most important questions in this context are related to responsibility. First, what is a government's primary responsibility? Second, how should both the government and individuals consider personal moral responsibility in this context? METHOD: This paper uses conceptual and normative analysis to address responsibility in the context of the pandemic. The paper also refers to reports published by the German Ethics Council, the Malaysian Bioethics Community and the Swedish National Council on Medical Ethics. RESULTS: The primary responsibility of governments is to create a balance between individual values and rights, one hand, and the health of the population, on the other. There are good reasons to conceive of individual responsibility as a virtue, having to do with the development of crucial character traits and habits. The responsibility of governments is connected to individual responsibility through the values of trust and solidarity. CONCLUSIONS: Governments need to communicate clearly (a) how they balance conflicts between collective health and individual rights and values and (b) what the chosen strategy entails in terms of collective and individual responsibility. Success requires attention to ethical values from all involved. Individuals will need to develop new character traits to help manage this pandemic and to prevent new ones. Governments must facilitate the development of such character traits by building trust and solidarity with and among citizens.

Relationship between moral responsibility for zoonotic pandemics outbreaks and industrial animal farms

The responsibility for the COVID-19 pandemic was first ascribed to persons associated with the Huanan Seafood Market. However, many scientists suggest that this pandemic is actually a consequence of human intrusion into nature. This opens up a whole new perspective for an examination of direct and indirect, individual and collective responsibility concerning this particular pandemic, but also zoonotic pandemics as such. In this context, one of the key issues are the consequences of factory-farming of animals, which contributes to circumstances in which zoonotic pandemics emerge. Moreover, it is part of a larger economic system, global capitalism, whose logic implies certain coercion toward its participants to keep it essentially unchanged and therefore to make sure that livestock health remains “the weakest link in our global health chain” (FAO). However, even though the precise answer to the issue of moral responsibility for zoonotic pandemics outbreaks in general and the COVID-19 pandemic in particular cannot be given, it is possible to list certain indicators and make a framework helpful in ascribing moral responsibility to certain persons. The paper intends to do so by examining the notion of responsibility and by applying it to the issues mentioned. The results of this analysis show that it is misleading to place moral blame on people involved in actions that directly caused the animal-to-human transmission of a certain virus or on humanity as a whole. © 2021, University of Belgrade - Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory. All rights reserved.

Caring During COVID-19: Reconfigurations of Gender and Family Relations During the Pandemic in Switzerland.

COVID-19 caused major changes in private and public arenas. Individuals were forced to reorganise their daily lives in response to the restrictive measures imposed by governments. The redistribution of gender roles and the responsibility for care provides an example of the reconfigurations that took place during the pandemic. This article sheds light on the implications of the pandemic for gender inequalities by exploring how care work was reconfigured as women and men sought to protect family members and navigated risks of infection. The study is based on qualitative data - interviews and observations - gathered in an interdisciplinary medical anthropology project. In the article, the authors focus on seven cases selected from a larger corpus to illustrate how reconfigurations of the gendered division of care work within families shifted during the pandemic as men assumed greater moral responsibility for safeguarding family members, without infringing the norms of masculinity. The first part of the article explores the intensification of care activities during lockdown for women living in the Canton de Vaud in Switzerland. The second part centres on the moral responsibility and duty for women and men to protect family members from viral exposure. The results from the study confirm not only that most care activities continued to be delegated to female family members, but also that men's roles evolved. While their safeguarding role can be understood as a new form of caring for men, the findings suggest that it was essentially crisis specific and did not challenge masculinity norms. The extent to which this reconfiguration of gender roles might have a longer-term impact on gender inequalities remains to be seen. Meanwhile, these observations could have important implications for policies aimed at mitigating the medium and long-term effects of the pandemic on gender inequality.

Public perception of laboratory animal testing: Historical, philosophical, and ethical view.

The use of laboratory animals in biomedical research is a matter of intense public debate. Recent statistics indicates that about half of the western population, sensitive to this discussion, would be in favor of animal testing while the other half would oppose it. Here, outlining scientific, historical, ethical, and philosophical aspects, we provide an integrated view explaining the reasons why biomedical research can hardly abandon laboratory animal testing. In this paper, we retrace the historical moments that mark the relationship between humans and other animal species. Then starting from Darwin's position on animal experimentation, we outline the steps that over time allowed the introduction of laws and rules that regulate animals' use in biomedical research. In our analysis, we present the perspectives of various authors, with the aim of delineating a theoretical framework within which to insert the ethical debate on laboratory animals research. Through the analysis of fundamental philosophical concepts and some practical examples, we propose a view according to which laboratory animals experimentation become ethically acceptable as far as it is guided by the goal of improving humans and other animal species (i.e., pets) life. Among the elements analyzed, there is the concept of responsibility that only active moral subjects (humans) have towards themselves and towards passive moral subjects (other animal species). We delineate the principle of cruelty that is useful to understand why research in laboratory animals should not be assimilated to a cruel act. Moreover, we touch upon the concepts of necessity and "good cause" to underline that, if biomedical research would have the possibility to avoid using animals, it would surely do that. To provide an example of the negative consequences occurring from not allowing laboratory animal research, we analyze the recent experience of Covid-19 epidemic. Finally, recalling the principle of "heuristics and biases" by Kahneman, we discuss why scientists should reconsider the way they are conveying information about their research to the general public.