Voo Teck Chuan, Lederman Zohar, Kaur Sharon
Centre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine.
Emergency Department, Assuta Samson Hospital.
Public Health Ethics. 2020 Oct 9;13(2):133-142. doi: 10.1093/phe/phaa024. eCollection 2020 Jul.
This article argues that outbreak preparedness and response should implement a 'family presence' policy for infected patients in isolation that includes the option of physical visits and care within the isolation facility under some conditions. While such a 'physical family presence' (PFP) policy could increase infections during an outbreak and may raise moral dilemmas, we argue that it is ethically justified based on the least infringement principle and the need to minimize the harms and burdens of isolation as a restrictive measure. Categorical prohibition of PFP during the course of an outbreak or epidemic is likely to result in unnecessary harms to patients and families, and violate values such as the moral commitments of families to care for each other. Supporting the option of PFP under particular circumstances, on the other hand, will least infringe these moral considerations. An additional reason for a family presence policy is that it may facilitate voluntary cooperation with isolation and other restrictive measures. We provide an analysis of these considerations for supporting modes of family presence during an outbreak emergency, before defending the riskier option of PFP in the isolation facility from plausible objections and concerns.
本文认为,疫情防范与应对措施应为隔离中的感染患者实施“家属陪伴”政策,其中包括在某些条件下允许家属进入隔离设施进行探视和照顾。虽然这种“家属实际陪伴”(PFP)政策可能会在疫情期间增加感染风险,并可能引发道德困境,但我们认为,基于最低限度侵权原则以及将隔离作为一种限制措施所带来的伤害和负担降至最低的必要性,该政策在伦理上是合理的。在疫情或流行病期间绝对禁止家属实际陪伴,可能会给患者及其家属带来不必要的伤害,并违背诸如家庭相互照顾的道德承诺等价值观。另一方面,在特定情况下支持家属实际陪伴的选择,将对这些道德考量的侵犯降至最低。支持家属陪伴政策的另一个原因是,它可能有助于患者自愿配合隔离及其他限制措施。我们在为隔离设施中风险更高的家属实际陪伴选项辩护,以回应合理的反对意见和担忧之前,先对疫情紧急情况下支持家属陪伴方式的这些考量进行分析。