Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Compulsory medical intervention versus external constraint in pandemic control.
Douglas, Thomas; Forsberg, Lisa; Pugh, Jonathan.
  • Douglas T; Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford University, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK thomas.douglas@philosophy.ox.ac.uk.
  • Forsberg L; Jesus College, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
  • Pugh J; Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom.
J Med Ethics ; 2020 Aug 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-724340
ABSTRACT
Would compulsory treatment or vaccination for COVID-19 be justified? In England, there would be significant legal barriers to it. However, we offer a conditional ethical argument in favour of allowing compulsory treatment and vaccination, drawing on an ethical comparison with external constraints-such as quarantine, isolation and 'lockdown'-that have already been authorised to control the pandemic in this jurisdiction. We argue that, if the permissive English approach to external constraints for COVID-19 has been justified, then there is a case for a similarly permissive approach to compulsory medical interventions.
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study Topics: Vaccines Language: English Year: 2020 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Medethics-2020-106435

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study Topics: Vaccines Language: English Year: 2020 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Medethics-2020-106435