Pahlman Kari, Williams Jane, Silva Diego S, Taffs Louis, Haire Bridget
Sydney Health Ethics, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Australia.
ACHEEV, School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Australia.
Public Health Ethics. 2023 Dec 20;17(1-2):67-79. doi: 10.1093/phe/phad027. eCollection 2024 Apr-Jul.
In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control.
2020年3月下旬,为应对新冠疫情,澳大利亚对所有国际抵达者在酒店和其他指定设施实施为期14天的强制监督检疫。自2020年7月起,大多数州和领地对检疫收取最高达每位成年人3220澳元的固定费用。收取该费用的理由是,已给澳大利亚人足够时间回国,且有必要收回与管理该计划相关的部分成本。本文基于对2020年3月至2021年1月期间接受检疫的58名返回澳大利亚的公民和居民的实证研究,旨在探讨人们对支付酒店检疫费用的体验,特别是在公平性以及相关的互惠原则方面。互惠原则要求国家有义务协助个人履行遵守公共卫生措施的责任,并避免给人群或个人带来不成比例的负担。尽管参与者对于检疫收费是否公平看法不一,但对许多人来说,这笔费用构成了重大负担和压力来源。鉴于检疫主要是为了公共利益,我们认为强加给个人的财务成本不符合互惠原则的要求。未来的检疫和隔离安排必须认真考虑尽量减轻受此类措施影响的个人负担的必要性,而且费用不应成为公共卫生和传染病控制中的新常态。