Erratum: The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Month of Bioethics in Finland-ADDENDUM (Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees (2021) 30 1 (114-122))

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debateScientificpeer-review

Abstract

The role of bioethicists amidst crises like the COVID-19 pandemic is not well defined. As professionals in the field, they should respond, but how? The observation of the early days of pandemic confinement in Finland showed that moral philosophers with limited experience in bioethics tended to apply their favorite theories to public decisions with varying results. Medical ethicists were more likely to lend support to the public authorities by soothing or descriptive accounts of the solutions assumed. These are approaches that Tuija Takala has called the firefighting and window dressing models of bioethics. Human rights lawyers drew attention to the flaws of the government's regulative thinking. Critical bioethicists offered analyses of the arguments presented and the moral and political theories that could be used as the basis of good and acceptable decisions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)204
Number of pages1
JournalCambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Volume30
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2021
MoE publication typeNot Eligible

Keywords

  • bioethics
  • COVID-19
  • doctrine of double effect.
  • human rights
  • pandemic
  • utilitarianism

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Erratum: The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Month of Bioethics in Finland-ADDENDUM (Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees (2021) 30 1 (114-122))'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this