{"title":"移民政策与公共卫生--2020 年希腊收容中心对寻求庇护者实施与 Covid-19 相关的行动限制的伦理问题。","authors":"George Makris","doi":"10.12688/wellcomeopenres.20547.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The emergency context of the Covid-19 pandemic necessitated the use of national and international public health measures of unprecedented scale to minimize mortality and morbidity, often in conflict with other principles and rights, such as the autonomy of individuals. Concerns have been voiced that for populations facing precarity, such as migrants, a disproportionate and unfair application of restrictive measures, deficient application of protective measures, and even enforcement of restrictive migration policies under the pretext of the pandemic has occurred.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Experts have proposed various principles as possible moral foundations of public health interventions. The author used two public health ethics frameworks to examine the ethical acceptability of movement restrictions on asylum seekers residing in refugee camps in Greece from March 2020 to October 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the principles described in the frameworks for the ethical application of movement restrictions were not adhered to. Main concerns include that, measures were prolonged despite lack of evidence about their effectiveness to reduce morbidity and mortality, while posing severe and disproportionate burdens for this population.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An ethically acceptable public health response to Covid-19 is incompatible with certain living conditions of refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants. Moral and political determinants of health, such as social inequalities and criteria for health resources allocation, can shape the form and effectiveness of public health interventions during emergencies. The role of the discipline of public health to address these underlying determinants, that influence health-related outcomes, is an important moral question in itself. It is essential for public health professionals to be aware of the moral theorizations that underpin their work, so as to ensure that their policies align with them and to contribute to the debate that shapes these determinants.</p>","PeriodicalId":23677,"journal":{"name":"Wellcome Open Research","volume":"9 ","pages":"115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11409434/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Migration policies versus public health - the ethics of Covid-19 related movement restrictions for asylum seekers in reception centers in Greece in 2020.\",\"authors\":\"George Makris\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/wellcomeopenres.20547.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The emergency context of the Covid-19 pandemic necessitated the use of national and international public health measures of unprecedented scale to minimize mortality and morbidity, often in conflict with other principles and rights, such as the autonomy of individuals. Concerns have been voiced that for populations facing precarity, such as migrants, a disproportionate and unfair application of restrictive measures, deficient application of protective measures, and even enforcement of restrictive migration policies under the pretext of the pandemic has occurred.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Experts have proposed various principles as possible moral foundations of public health interventions. The author used two public health ethics frameworks to examine the ethical acceptability of movement restrictions on asylum seekers residing in refugee camps in Greece from March 2020 to October 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the principles described in the frameworks for the ethical application of movement restrictions were not adhered to. Main concerns include that, measures were prolonged despite lack of evidence about their effectiveness to reduce morbidity and mortality, while posing severe and disproportionate burdens for this population.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An ethically acceptable public health response to Covid-19 is incompatible with certain living conditions of refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants. Moral and political determinants of health, such as social inequalities and criteria for health resources allocation, can shape the form and effectiveness of public health interventions during emergencies. The role of the discipline of public health to address these underlying determinants, that influence health-related outcomes, is an important moral question in itself. It is essential for public health professionals to be aware of the moral theorizations that underpin their work, so as to ensure that their policies align with them and to contribute to the debate that shapes these determinants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23677,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Wellcome Open Research\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"115\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11409434/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Wellcome Open Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.20547.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wellcome Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.20547.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Migration policies versus public health - the ethics of Covid-19 related movement restrictions for asylum seekers in reception centers in Greece in 2020.
Background: The emergency context of the Covid-19 pandemic necessitated the use of national and international public health measures of unprecedented scale to minimize mortality and morbidity, often in conflict with other principles and rights, such as the autonomy of individuals. Concerns have been voiced that for populations facing precarity, such as migrants, a disproportionate and unfair application of restrictive measures, deficient application of protective measures, and even enforcement of restrictive migration policies under the pretext of the pandemic has occurred.
Methods: Experts have proposed various principles as possible moral foundations of public health interventions. The author used two public health ethics frameworks to examine the ethical acceptability of movement restrictions on asylum seekers residing in refugee camps in Greece from March 2020 to October 2020.
Results: Most of the principles described in the frameworks for the ethical application of movement restrictions were not adhered to. Main concerns include that, measures were prolonged despite lack of evidence about their effectiveness to reduce morbidity and mortality, while posing severe and disproportionate burdens for this population.
Conclusions: An ethically acceptable public health response to Covid-19 is incompatible with certain living conditions of refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants. Moral and political determinants of health, such as social inequalities and criteria for health resources allocation, can shape the form and effectiveness of public health interventions during emergencies. The role of the discipline of public health to address these underlying determinants, that influence health-related outcomes, is an important moral question in itself. It is essential for public health professionals to be aware of the moral theorizations that underpin their work, so as to ensure that their policies align with them and to contribute to the debate that shapes these determinants.
Wellcome Open ResearchBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
426
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍:
Wellcome Open Research publishes scholarly articles reporting any basic scientific, translational and clinical research that has been funded (or co-funded) by Wellcome. Each publication must have at least one author who has been, or still is, a recipient of a Wellcome grant. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others, is welcome and will be published irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies are all suitable. See the full list of article types here. All articles are published using a fully transparent, author-driven model: the authors are solely responsible for the content of their article. Invited peer review takes place openly after publication, and the authors play a crucial role in ensuring that the article is peer-reviewed by independent experts in a timely manner. Articles that pass peer review will be indexed in PubMed and elsewhere. Wellcome Open Research is an Open Research platform: all articles are published open access; the publishing and peer-review processes are fully transparent; and authors are asked to include detailed descriptions of methods and to provide full and easy access to source data underlying the results to improve reproducibility.