Department of Bioethics and Humanities, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States.
Department of Philosophy, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa.
Bioethics. 2022 Jul;36(6):699-707. doi: 10.1111/bioe.13028. Epub 2022 Apr 25.
This paper argues for global sharing of COVID-19 treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond based on principles of global solidarity. It starts by distinguishing two types of COVID-19 treatments and models sharing strategies for each in small-group scenarios, contrasting groups that are solidaristic with those composed of self-interest maximizers to show the appeal of solidaristic reasoning. It then extends the analysis, arguing that a similar logic should apply within and between nations. To further elaborate global solidarity, the paper distinguishes morally voluntary, sliding-scale, and mandatory versions. It argues for an all-hands-on-deck approach and gives examples to illustrate. The paper concludes that during the COVID-19 crisis, global solidarity is a core value, and global sharing of COVID-19 treatments should be considered a duty of justice, not of charity.
本文基于全球团结原则,主张在 COVID-19 大流行期间及以后,将 COVID-19 治疗方法在全球范围内共享。本文首先区分了两种 COVID-19 治疗方法,并为每种方法制定了小团体情景下的共享策略,将团结的群体与以自身利益最大化为导向的群体进行对比,以展示团结推理的吸引力。然后,本文将分析扩展到国家内部和国家之间,认为类似的逻辑应该适用。为了进一步阐述全球团结,本文区分了道德自愿、滑动比例和强制性版本。本文主张采取全力以赴的方法,并举例说明。本文得出结论,在 COVID-19 危机期间,全球团结是一项核心价值,全球共享 COVID-19 治疗方法应被视为正义的责任,而不是慈善的责任。