全球突发卫生事件中的悲剧性选择:比较经济法思考

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW
Pierre de Gioia-Carabellese, Camilla Della Giustina
{"title":"全球突发卫生事件中的悲剧性选择:比较经济法思考","authors":"Pierre de Gioia-Carabellese, Camilla Della Giustina","doi":"10.54648/euro2022010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The health emergency sparked off by the spread of the pathogen COVID-19, has led, especially during its first phase, to a situation of scarcity of resources. The problem, in other words, consisted of a disproportion between the demand from individuals who needed to receive emergency care and a situation of limited resources, including health personnel, beds and necessary machinery. Therefore, the multifarious scientific societies have drawn up guidance documents to define access criteria on the basis of the ethical principles developed by Beauchamp and Childress. In light of such a background, the analysis focuses on the legal analysis of the first recommendations adopted in Italy (recommendations and guidelines elaborated first by Italian Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) and then amended by SIAARTI Società Italiana Medicina Legale e delle Assicurazioni (SIMLA)). In this scenario, critical issues are identified and later analysed, also in the light of what was decided by the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (ASSM), as well as the British counterpart, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Ultimately, bio-law is at the mercy of a less reputed, yet more strategic, factor: bio-law-and-economics. Covid-19, health resources management, Italian law, UK legislation, a comparison","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Tragic Choices During the Global Health Emergency: Comparative Economic Law Reflections\",\"authors\":\"Pierre de Gioia-Carabellese, Camilla Della Giustina\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/euro2022010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The health emergency sparked off by the spread of the pathogen COVID-19, has led, especially during its first phase, to a situation of scarcity of resources. The problem, in other words, consisted of a disproportion between the demand from individuals who needed to receive emergency care and a situation of limited resources, including health personnel, beds and necessary machinery. Therefore, the multifarious scientific societies have drawn up guidance documents to define access criteria on the basis of the ethical principles developed by Beauchamp and Childress. In light of such a background, the analysis focuses on the legal analysis of the first recommendations adopted in Italy (recommendations and guidelines elaborated first by Italian Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) and then amended by SIAARTI Società Italiana Medicina Legale e delle Assicurazioni (SIMLA)). In this scenario, critical issues are identified and later analysed, also in the light of what was decided by the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (ASSM), as well as the British counterpart, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Ultimately, bio-law is at the mercy of a less reputed, yet more strategic, factor: bio-law-and-economics. Covid-19, health resources management, Italian law, UK legislation, a comparison\",\"PeriodicalId\":43955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Public Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Public Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2022010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2022010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

COVID-19病原体传播引发的卫生紧急情况导致资源短缺,特别是在第一阶段。换句话说,问题在于需要接受紧急护理的个人的需求与资源(包括保健人员、床位和必要机器)有限的情况之间的不相称。因此,各个科学协会都制定了指导文件,以Beauchamp和Childress提出的伦理原则为基础来定义获取标准。鉴于这样的背景,分析的重点是对意大利通过的第一批建议的法律分析(意大利麻醉、镇痛、复苏和重症监护学会(SIAARTI)首先制定的建议和指南,然后由意大利麻醉、镇痛、复苏和重症监护学会(SIMLA)修订)。在这种情况下,也根据瑞士医学科学院(ASSM)以及英国国家健康和护理卓越研究所(NICE)的决定,确定并随后分析关键问题。最终,生物法受制于一个不太出名但更具战略意义的因素:生物法与经济。Covid-19,卫生资源管理,意大利法律,英国立法,比较
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Tragic Choices During the Global Health Emergency: Comparative Economic Law Reflections
The health emergency sparked off by the spread of the pathogen COVID-19, has led, especially during its first phase, to a situation of scarcity of resources. The problem, in other words, consisted of a disproportion between the demand from individuals who needed to receive emergency care and a situation of limited resources, including health personnel, beds and necessary machinery. Therefore, the multifarious scientific societies have drawn up guidance documents to define access criteria on the basis of the ethical principles developed by Beauchamp and Childress. In light of such a background, the analysis focuses on the legal analysis of the first recommendations adopted in Italy (recommendations and guidelines elaborated first by Italian Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) and then amended by SIAARTI Società Italiana Medicina Legale e delle Assicurazioni (SIMLA)). In this scenario, critical issues are identified and later analysed, also in the light of what was decided by the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (ASSM), as well as the British counterpart, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Ultimately, bio-law is at the mercy of a less reputed, yet more strategic, factor: bio-law-and-economics. Covid-19, health resources management, Italian law, UK legislation, a comparison
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信