Verd Sergio
Pediatric Unit, La Vileta Surgery, Department of Primary Care, Baleares Health Authority, Matamusinos Street, 07013 Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Balearic Institute of Medical Research (IdISBa), Valldemossa Rd., 07120 Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Children (Basel). 2023 Jan 25;10(2):211. doi: 10.3390/children10020211.
Sometimes, when a public health disaster strikes, mandatory freedom-limiting restrictions must be enforced in order to save lives. During the first waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, the customary and necessary exchange of ideas in academia drastically changed in most countries, and the absence of debate on the restrictions enforced became evident. Now that the pandemic seems to be drawing to an end, the aim of this article is to spark clinical and public debate on the ethical issues concerning pediatric COVID-19 mandates in an attempt to analyze what happened. With theoretical reflection, and not empirical inquiry, we address the mitigation measures which proved detrimental to children despite being beneficial to other segments of the population. We focus on three key points: (i) the sacrifice of fundamental children's rights for the greater good, (ii) the feasibility of cost-benefit analyses to make public health decisions and restrictions which affect children, and (iii) to analyze the impediments to allowing children's voices to be heard concerning their medical treatment.
有时，当公共卫生灾难来袭时，必须实施强制性的限制自由措施以拯救生命。在新冠疫情的最初几波冲击中，大多数国家学术界惯常且必要的思想交流发生了巨大变化，对所实施限制措施缺乏辩论的情况变得明显起来。既然疫情似乎即将结束，本文旨在引发关于儿科新冠疫情强制要求相关伦理问题的临床和公众辩论，试图分析所发生的事情。通过理论思考而非实证探究，我们探讨了那些虽对其他人群有益但却被证明对儿童有害的缓解措施。我们关注三个关键点：（一）为了更大利益而牺牲儿童的基本权利；（二）进行成本效益分析以做出影响儿童的公共卫生决策和限制措施的可行性；（三）分析在儿童医疗问题上听取他们声音所面临的障碍。
