Hastings Cent Rep. 2020 May;50(3):5-6. doi: 10.1002/hast.1117.
Covid-19 confronts us with tragic choices, in which every option is unacceptable. On the New York State Task Force on Life and the Law, I worked on guidelines for such situations. We did not envision the scale or character of Covid-19. To minimize fear that the decisions made in these situations might be unfair, we all must know what guidelines or mandates inform them. Only with transparency about how decisions will be made, by whom, and according to what requirements can we have confidence that fairness prevails. We now face many related questions about process, goals, leadership, and trust. For example, how might ethical guidelines evolve as scientific understanding advances? Should guidelines vary with different venues? And if, as I have argued, judgment is necessary even with the best of guidelines, how can we prepare clinicians to make good judgments? Are there implications for better training of personnel in nonemergency times for what they might face in the worst of times?
Covid-19 使我们面临着悲惨的选择,每一种选择都是不可接受的。在纽约州生命与法律特别工作组,我参与了制定此类情况下的指导方针。我们没有预见到新冠疫情的规模或特征。为了最大程度地减少对这些情况下做出的决定可能不公平的担忧,我们都必须知道是什么指导方针或命令为其提供了信息。只有对决策的制定方式、由谁制定以及根据哪些要求有透明度,我们才能有信心确保公平。现在,我们面临着许多与程序、目标、领导和信任相关的问题。例如,随着科学理解的进步,道德准则会如何演变?准则是否应该因不同的场所而异?如果像我所主张的那样,即使有最好的准则,判断也是必要的,我们如何才能使临床医生做好判断?对于在非紧急时期为最坏时期可能面临的情况对人员进行更好的培训,是否会有影响?