Ismaili M'hamdi Hafez, de Beaufort Inez
Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam.
Public Health Ethics. 2021 May 24;14(2):168-179. doi: 10.1093/phe/phab009. eCollection 2021 Jul.
Poor pregnancy outcomes and inequalities in these outcomes remain a major challenge, even in prosperous societies that have high-quality health care and public health policy in place. In this article, we propose that justice demands the improvement of what we call the 'health agency' of parents-to-be as part of a response to these poor outcomes. We take health agency to have three aspects: (i) the capacity to form health-goals one has reason to value, (ii) the control one perceives to have over achieving those health-goals and (iii) the freedom(s) one has to achieve those health-goals. We will moreover argue that this demand of justice can be best based on a perfectionist rather than neutralist method of justification. Subsequently, we will argue that perfectionist policy may be paternalistic but not wrongfully paternalistic. This leads us to conclude that perfectionism should be adopted to inform and justify public health policy that is aimed at improving health agency in general and counteracting poor pregnancy outcomes and inequalities in perinatal health outcomes in particular.
即使在拥有高质量医疗保健和公共卫生政策的繁荣社会中,不良妊娠结局以及这些结局中的不平等现象仍然是一项重大挑战。在本文中,我们提出,作为应对这些不良结局的一部分,正义要求改善我们所称的准父母的“健康能动性”。我们认为健康能动性有三个方面:(i)形成有理由重视的健康目标的能力,(ii)个人认为对实现这些健康目标具有的掌控力,以及(iii)个人为实现这些健康目标所拥有的自由。此外,我们将论证,这种正义要求最好基于一种至善主义而非中立主义的正当性证明方法。随后,我们将论证至善主义政策可能具有家长式作风,但并非不正当的家长式作风。这使我们得出结论,应该采用至善主义来为旨在总体上改善健康能动性、特别是应对不良妊娠结局和围产期健康结局不平等现象的公共卫生政策提供信息并证明其合理性。