COVID-19 differentiated measures for unvaccinated individuals: The need for clear goals and strong justifications.

Numerous countries and jurisdictions have implemented differential COVID-19 public health restrictions based on individual vaccination status to mitigate the public health risks posed by unvaccinated individuals. Although it is scientifically and ethically justifiable to introduce such vaccination-based differentiated measures as a risk-based approach to resume high-risk activities in an ongoing pandemic, their justification is weakened by lack of clarity on their intended goals and the specific risks or potential harms they intend to mitigate. Furthermore, the criteria for the removal of differentiated measures may not be clear, which raises the possibility of shifting goalposts without clear justification and with potential for unfairly discriminatory consequences. This paper seeks to clarify the ethical justification of COVID-19 vaccination-based differentiated measures based on a public health risk-based approach, with focus on their deployment in domestic settings. We argue that such measures should be consistent with the principal goal of COVID-19 vaccination programmes, which is to reduce the incidence of severely ill patients and associated healthcare burdens so as to protect a health system. We provide some considerations for the removal of vaccination-based differentiated measures based on this goal.

Recommendations for the development of Egyptian human biobanking ethical guidelines.

Background: The development of biobanks is associated with the emergence of new ethical challenges. In Egypt, several biobanks have been established, but there are no specific local ethical guidelines to guide their work. The aim of this study is to develop recommendations for the Egyptian human biobanking ethical guidelines, which take into consideration the specific cultural and legal framework in Egypt. Methods: We searched the literature for available biobanking ethical guidelines. Six themes were the concern of search, namely; informed consent, data protection, return of results, sharing of samples and data, community engagement, and stakeholder engagement. If a document refers to another guideline, the new source is identified and the previous step is repeated. Results: Ten documents were identified, which were analyzed for the themes mentioned above. Guidelines and best practices were identified, and then compared with the published documents about ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI) related to biomedical research in Egypt to reach best recommendations. Conclusions: We have proposed, by way of recommendations, key characteristics that a national ethics framework in Egypt could have. On informed consent, the practice of broad consent may be harmonized among biobanks in Egypt. Clear policies on return of research results, training requirements and availability of genetic counseling could also be instituted through the national framework. Additionally, such a framework should facilitate community and stakeholders engagement, which is important to secure trust and build consensus on contentious issues arising from sample and data sharing across borders and commercialization, among other concerns.

In the patient's best interest: appraising social network site information for surrogate decision making.

This paper will discuss why and how social network sites ought to be used in surrogate decision making (SDM), with focus on a context like Singapore in which substituted judgment is incorporated as part of best interest assessment for SDM, as guided by the Code of Practice for making decisions for those lacking mental capacity under the Mental Capacity Act (2008). Specifically, the paper will argue that the Code of Practice already supports an ethical obligation, as part of a patient-centred care approach, to look for and appraise social network site (SNS) as a source of information for best interest decision making. As an important preliminary, the paper will draw on Berg's arguments to support the use of SNS information as a resource for SDM. It will also supplement her account for how SNS information ought to be weighed against or considered alongside other evidence of patient preference or wishes, such as advance directives and anecdotal accounts by relatives.

Delays in Brain Death Certification in an Opt-out Deceased Organ Donation System: Causes, Ethical Problems, and Avoidance.

Brain death certification can be a clinically and ethically challenging affair. Healthcare workers are expected to refer patients for brain death certification to identify potential organ donors, but family members may be ill-prepared for this turn of events. Already distraught families may not appreciate delays in brain death certification, but such delays are common because of the need to manage the patient's altered physiological state to allow testing. Opportunities for donation are sometimes lost because of the unnecessary delay. With focus on an opt-out organ donation law, we discuss causes of delays in brain death certification, and the ethical issues faced by clinicians in using tests to certify patients. To resolve the issues, we argue for the use of supplementary confirmatory tests as part of a more protocol-driven approach to brain death certification to avoid delays. Such tests should be regarded as part of the donation process funded by the state.