传染病控制中直接观察疗法的伦理学

J.D.H. Porter, J.A. Ogden
{"title":"传染病控制中直接观察疗法的伦理学","authors":"J.D.H. Porter,&nbsp;J.A. Ogden","doi":"10.1016/S0020-2452(97)81366-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Interventions for infectious disease control, like directly observed therapy (DOT), embody the imbalance of power and capacity between the public health profession and the infected person, and lead to a moral debate over public health and civil liberties. The four ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice provide a basis for a rigorous consideration and resolution of this ethical dilemma. This paper descibes the ethical debate around the use of DOT for infectious disease control, using tuberculosis as an example.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":89103,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin de l'Institut Pasteur","volume":"95 3","pages":"Pages 117-127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0020-2452(97)81366-8","citationCount":"32","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethics of directly observed therapy for the control of infectious diseases\",\"authors\":\"J.D.H. Porter,&nbsp;J.A. Ogden\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S0020-2452(97)81366-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Interventions for infectious disease control, like directly observed therapy (DOT), embody the imbalance of power and capacity between the public health profession and the infected person, and lead to a moral debate over public health and civil liberties. The four ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice provide a basis for a rigorous consideration and resolution of this ethical dilemma. This paper descibes the ethical debate around the use of DOT for infectious disease control, using tuberculosis as an example.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":89103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin de l'Institut Pasteur\",\"volume\":\"95 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 117-127\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0020-2452(97)81366-8\",\"citationCount\":\"32\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin de l'Institut Pasteur\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020245297813668\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin de l'Institut Pasteur","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020245297813668","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

摘要

传染病控制的干预措施,如直接观察疗法(DOT),体现了公共卫生专业人员与感染者之间权力和能力的不平衡,并导致了关于公共卫生和公民自由的道德辩论。自主、善、无害、正义四项伦理原则为认真思考和解决这一伦理困境提供了基础。本文以结核病为例,描述了围绕使用DOT进行传染病控制的伦理辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ethics of directly observed therapy for the control of infectious diseases

Interventions for infectious disease control, like directly observed therapy (DOT), embody the imbalance of power and capacity between the public health profession and the infected person, and lead to a moral debate over public health and civil liberties. The four ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice provide a basis for a rigorous consideration and resolution of this ethical dilemma. This paper descibes the ethical debate around the use of DOT for infectious disease control, using tuberculosis as an example.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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