Alejandra González-Duarte1, Martha Kaufer-Horwitz2, Gerardo Gamba3, Raúl Rivera-Moscoso4, Carlos A Aguilar-Salinas5. 1. Department of Neurology, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán (INCMyNSZ), Mexico City, Mexico. 2. Department of Endocrinology, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico. 3. Direction of Research, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán (INCMyNSZ), Mexico City; Molecular Physiology Unit, Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City; Mexico. 4. Direction of Strategic Planning, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán (INCMyNSZ), Mexico City, Mexico. 5. Direction of Nutrition; Metabolic Diseases Research Unit,and Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, INCMNSZ, Mexico City; School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Monterrey, N.L., Mexico.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronavirus (CoV) disease (COVID)-19 poses difficult situations in which the ethical course of action is not clear, or choices are made between equally unacceptable responses. METHODS: A web search was performed using the terms "bioethics; COVID-19; ethics; severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2; emergent care; pandemic; and public health emergencies." RESULTS: Protection from COVID-19 has resulted in the cancellation of necessary medical interventions, lengthened suffering, and potential non-COVID-19 deaths. Prolonged lockdown reduced well-being, triggering or aggravating mental illnesses and violence, and escalated medical risks. Collateral damage includes restrictions on visitations to hospitals, alienation from the deceased relative, or lack of warm caring of patients. Finally, in a public health crisis, public health interest overrides individual rights if it results in severe harm to the community. CONCLUSION: Balancing ethical dilemmas are one more challenge in the COVID-19 pandemic.
BACKGROUND:Coronavirus (CoV) disease (COVID)-19 poses difficult situations in which the ethical course of action is not clear, or choices are made between equally unacceptable responses. METHODS: A web search was performed using the terms "bioethics; COVID-19; ethics; severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2; emergent care; pandemic; and public health emergencies." RESULTS: Protection from COVID-19 has resulted in the cancellation of necessary medical interventions, lengthened suffering, and potential non-COVID-19deaths. Prolonged lockdown reduced well-being, triggering or aggravating mental illnesses and violence, and escalated medical risks. Collateral damage includes restrictions on visitations to hospitals, alienation from the deceased relative, or lack of warm caring of patients. Finally, in a public health crisis, public health interest overrides individual rights if it results in severe harm to the community. CONCLUSION: Balancing ethical dilemmas are one more challenge in the COVID-19 pandemic.