Dave Riya, Gupta Rashmi
Cognitive and Behavioural Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2020 Dec 2;7:590265. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2020.590265. eCollection 2020.
The rise of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a digital world has expectedly called upon technologies, such as wearables and mobile devices, to work in conjunction with public health interventions to tackle the pandemic. One significant example of this integration is the deployment of proximity tracking apps on smartphones to enhance traditional contact tracing methods. Many countries have adopted proximity tracking apps; however, there is a large degree of global differentiation in the voluntariness of the apps. Further, the concept of a mandatory policy-forcing individuals to use the apps-has been met with ethical concerns (e.g., privacy and liberty). While ethical considerations surrounding deployment have been put forth, such as by the World Health Organization, ethical justifications for a mandatory policy are lacking. Here, we use the Faden-Shebaya framework, which was formed to justify public health interventions, to determine if the compulsory use of proximity tracking apps is ethically appropriate. We show that while theoretically justified, due to the current state of proximity tracking applications and societal factors, it is difficult to defend a mandatory policy in practice.
在数字时代，2019冠状病毒病（COVID-19）的出现理所当然地促使可穿戴设备和移动设备等技术与公共卫生干预措施协同发挥作用，以应对这一疫情。这种整合的一个重要例子是在智能手机上部署近距离追踪应用程序，以改进传统的接触者追踪方法。许多国家都采用了近距离追踪应用程序；然而，这些应用程序的自愿性在全球范围内存在很大差异。此外，强制个人使用这些应用程序的政策概念引发了伦理问题（如隐私和自由）。虽然围绕应用程序部署的伦理考量已经提出，比如世界卫生组织，但缺乏对强制政策的伦理正当理由。在此，我们使用为证明公共卫生干预措施合理性而构建的法登-谢巴亚框架，来确定强制使用近距离追踪应用程序在伦理上是否合适。我们表明，虽然从理论上讲是合理的，但鉴于近距离追踪应用程序的当前状态和社会因素，在实践中很难为强制政策进行辩护。
