|
Medical ethics
Preparing
for a pandemic
With the World Health Organisation warning of an inevitable pandemic
of H5N1 avian influenza, decisionmaking during the crisis will be key,
as will quarantine, duty to care and resource allocations. An
international medical ethics think tank offers a guide.
Coping effectively with a
predicted influenza
pandemic that threatens to
affect the health of millions
worldwide, hobble
economies and overwhelm
healthcare systems will
require more than new
drugs and good infection
control.
An international medical
ethics think-tank says that
all-important public cooperation
and the co-ordination
of public officials at all
levels requires open and
ethical decision making.
The Influenza Pandemic
Working Group at the
University of Toronto Joint
Centre for Bioethics recommends
a 15-point ethical
guide for pandemic planning,
based in part on experiences
and study of the Severe
Acute Respiratory Syndrome
(SARS) crisis of 2003.
The report says plans to
deal with a flu pandemic
need to be founded on
commonly held ethical
values. People need to
subscribe in advance to the
rationale behind such
choices as: the priority
recipients of resources,
including hospital services
and medicines; how much
risk front line healthcare
workers should take; and support given to people
under restrictions such as
quarantine. Decision makers
and the public need to be
engaged so plans reflect
what most people will
accept as fair and good for
public health.
“A shared set of ethical
values is the glue that can
hold us together during an
intense crisis,” says Peter
Singer, MD, director of the
University of Toronto Joint
Centre for Bioethics (JCB),
which undertook the advisory
report. “A key lesson
from the SARS outbreak is
that fairness becomes more
important during a time of
crisis and confusion. And
the time to consider these
questions and processes in
relation to a threatened
major pandemic is now.”
The report concludes that
flu pandemic plans universally
need an ethical component
that address four key
issues:
1. Health workers' duty to
provide care during a
communicable disease
outbreak.
2. Restricting liberty in
the interest of public health
by measures such as quarantine;
3. Priority setting,
including the allocation of
scarce resources such as
medicines;
4. Global governance
implications, such as travel
advisories.
Healthcare workers duty to care
The SARS crisis exposed
healthcare systems to hard
ethical choices that rapidly
arose. Dozens of healthcare
workers, for example, were
infected through their work
and some died. Others failed
to report for duty to treat
SARS patients out of fear for
their own health or that of
their family. A flu
pandemic, where there may
be no absolute protection or
cure, would put far greater
pressures on healthcare
systems around the world.
“Workers will face
competing obligations, such
as their duty to care for
patients and to protect their
own health and that of
families and friends,” says JCB member Ross Upshur,
MD, director, Primary Care
Research Unit, Sunnybrook
and Women's College
Health Sciences Centre.
“Medical codes of ethics in
various countries provide
little specific guidance on
how to cope with this very
real dilemma. Professional
colleges and associations
need to provide this kind of
particular guidance in
advance of an infectious
disease outbreak crisis.”
Governments and hospitals
also need to provide for
the health and safety of
workers, and for the care of
those who fall ill on duty.
This might include an insurance
fund for life and
disability to cover healthcare
workers who become
sick or die as they place
themselves in harm's way.
The human costs of
restrictive measures
Officials need to provide
support for those in quarantine,
cut off from family,
friends, work, shopping and
possibly medical care for
other aliments, the report
says. The public should also
be made aware of the need
for quarantine and the consequences
of non-compliance.
“The decision to use
restrictive measures need to
be made in an open, fair and
legitimate manner. The
public has a right to know
the compelling public
health reasons for curtailing
rights and restricting
normal activities. If quarantines
are used, those affected
need adequate care and job
protection. Preventing
financial hardship is important
to obtaining full
compliance from the
public,” says Dr Upshur.
Measures to protect against stigmatisation and to safeguard
the privacy of individuals
and/or communities
affected by quarantine also
should be part of pandemic
preparedness plans the
report recommends.
Allocating scarce resources, medicines
All countries will face scarcities
of medicines, equipment
and healthcare workers
during a pandemic,
according to the group.
Governments, hospitals and
health regions should publicise
a clear rationale for
giving priority access to antiviral
medicines and vaccines
to particular groups (eg.
front line health workers,
children, decision-makers).
Advance planning ought
to include criteria for
resource allocation decisions,
created in consultation
with the general public.
Travel bans
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has
warned that if the H5N1
strain of bird flu mutates
and infects people it could
reach all continents in less
than three months. The
WHO would likely impose
regional travel restrictions
in hopes of slowing the
spread of the disease.
However, such decisions
can have major economic
impacts. Canada, and
Toronto in particular,
suffered millions in
economic losses when the
WHO advised international
travelers against all
nonessential travel because
of SARS.
Decisions about travel
restrictions need to be
clearly justified and the
process must be transparent,
the report says.
At the same time, the
WHO relies on individual
countries for reporting
disease outbreaks.
Such
surveillance may be beyond
the capacity of many developing
countries. The developed
world should continue
to invest in the surveillance
capacity and the overall
public health infrastructures
of developing countries.
The WHO recommends
that ethical issues be a
consideration in the planning
process for an
influenza pandemic.
Canada's province of
Ontario has incorporated
this framework into its plan.
“Other jurisdictions and
nations should assess their
pandemic plan against this
ethical framework and these
recommendations,” says Dr
Singer.
“Looking ahead, we can
say that if the pandemic
strikes it will cause great
hardship, but societies will
struggle through. They will
be better able to do so if
they have general agreement
on an ethical
approach. Afterwards,
history will judge today's
leaders on how well they
took decision on the ethical
challenges they faced in the
midst of the crisis.”
Ten substantive values
to guide ethical decision-making for a
pandemic influenza
outbreak
Individual liberty
In a public health crisis,
restrictions to individual liberty may be necessary to
protect the public from
serious harm. Restrictions
to individual liberty should:
- Be proportional, neces
sary and relevant.
- Employ the least
restrictive means.
- Be applied equitably.
Protection of the public
from harm
To protect the public from
harm, healthcare organisations
and public health
authorities may be required
to take actions that impinge
on individual liberty.
Decision makers should:
- Weigh the imperative
for compliance.
- Provide reasons for
public health measures to encourage
compliance.
- Establish mechanisms
to review decisions.
Proportionality
Proportionality requires
that restrictions to individual
liberty and measures
taken to protect the public
from harm should not
exceed what is necessary to
address the actual level of
risk to or critical needs of
the community.
Privacy
Individuals have a right to
privacy in healthcare. In a
public health crisis, it may
be necessary to override this
right to protect the public
from serious harm.
Duty to provide care
Inherent to all codes of
ethics for healthcare professionals
is the duty to provide
care and to respond to
suffering. healthcare
providers will have to weigh
demands of their professional
roles against other
competing obligations to
their own health, and to
family and friends.
Moreover, healthcare
workers will face significant
challenges related to resource
allocation, scope of practice,
professional liability and
workplace conditions.
Reciprocity
Reciprocity requires that
society support those who
face a disproportionate
burden in protecting the
public good, and take steps
to minimise burdens as
much as possible. Measures
to protect the public good
are likely to impose a disproportionate
burden on
healthcare workers, patients
and their families.
Equity
All patients have an equal
claim to receive the healthcare
they need under normal
conditions. During a
pandemic, difficult decisions
will need to be made about
which health services to
maintain and which to defer.
Depending on the severity of
the health crisis, this could
curtail not only elective
surgeries, but could also limit
the provision of emergency
or necessary services.
Trust
Trust is an essential component
of the relationships
among clinicians and
patients, staff and their organisations, the public
and healthcare providers or
organisations, and among
organisations within a
health system.
Decision makers will be
confronted with the challenge
of maintaining stakeholder
trust while simultaneously
implementing
various control measures
during an evolving health
crisis. Trust is enhanced by
upholding such process
values as transparency.
Solidarity
As the world learned from SARS, a pandemic influenza
outbreak, will require a new
vision of global solidarity
and a vision of solidarity
among nations. A pandemic
can challenge conventional
ideas of national sovereignty,
security or territoriality.
It also requires solidarity
within and among
healthcare institutions.
It calls for collaborative
approaches that set aside
traditional values of selfinterest
or territoriality
among healthcare professionals,
services or institutions.
Stewardship
Those entrusted with governance
roles should be
guided by the notion of
stewardship. Inherent in
stewardship are the notions
of trust, ethical behaviour
and good decision-making.
This implies that decisions
regarding resources are
intended to achieve the best
patient health and public
health outcomes given the
unique circumstances of the
influenza crisis.
Five procedural values
to guide ethical decision-
making for a
pandemic influenza
outbreak
Reasonable
Decisions should be based
on reasons (ie. evidence,
principles and values) that
stakeholders can agree are
relevant to meeting health
needs in a pandemic
influenza crisis. The decisions
should be made by
people who are credible and
accountable.
Open and transparent
The process by which decisions
are made must be
open to scrutiny, and the
basis upon which decisions
are made should be publicly
accessible.
Inclusive
Decisions should be made
explicitly with stakeholder
views in mind, and there
should be opportunities to
engage stakeholders in the
decision-making process.
Responsive
There should be opportunities
to revisit and revise
decisions as new information
emerges throughout
the crisis. There should be
mechanisms to address
disputes and complaints.
Accountable
There should be mechanisms in place to ensure
that decision makers are
answerable for their actions
and inactions. Defence of
actions and inactions
should be grounded in the
14 other ethical values
proposed above.
Summary of
Recommendations
An ethical guide for
pandemic planning
1. National, provincial
/state/territorial, and
municipal governments, as
well as the healthcare
sector, should ensure that
their pandemic plans
include an ethical component.
2. National, provincial
/state/territorial, and
municipal governments, as
well as the healthcare
sector, should consider
incorporating both substantive
and procedural values
in the ethical component of
their pandemic plans.
Four key ethical issues
Issue 1: Health workers'
duty to provide care during
a communicable disease
outbreak
1. Professional colleges
and associations should
provide, by way of their
codes of ethics, clear guidance
to members in advance
of a major communicable
disease outbreak, such as
pandemic flu. Existing
mechanisms should be identified,
or means should be
developed, to inform college
members as to expectations
and obligations regarding
the duty to provide care
during a communicable
disease outbreak.
2. Governments and the
healthcare sector should
ensure that:
a. care providers' safety
is protected at all times,
and providers are able
to discharge duties
and receive sufficient
support throughout a
period of extraordi
nary demands; and
b. disability insurance
and death benefits are
available to staff and
their families
adversely affected
while performing their
duties.
3. Governments, hospitals
and health regions
should develop human
resource strategies for
communicable disease
outbreaks that cover the
diverse occupational roles,
that are transparent in how
individuals are assigned to
roles in the management of
an outbreak, and that are
equitable with respect to
the distribution of risk
among individuals and
occupational categories.
Issue 2: Restricting liberty in
the interest of public health
by measures such as quarantine
1. Governments and the
healthcare sector should
ensure that pandemic
influenza response plans
include a comprehensive and
transparent protocol for the
implementation of restrictive
measures. The protocol
should be founded upon the
principles of proportionality
and least restrictive means,
should balance individual
liberties with protection of
public from harm and should
build in safeguards such as
the right of appeal.
2. Governments and the
healthcare sector should
ensure that the public is
aware of:
a. the rationale for
restrictive measures;
b. the benefits of compli
ance; and
c. the consequences of
non-compliance.
3. Governments and the
healthcare sector should
include measures in their
pandemic influenza
preparedness plans to
protect against stigmatisation
and to safeguard the
privacy of individuals
and/or communities
affected by quarantine or
other restrictive measures.
4. Governments and the
healthcare sector should
institute measures and
processes to guarantee provisions
and support services to
individuals and/or communities
affected by restrictive
measures, such as quarantine
orders, implemented during
a pandemic influenza emergency.
Plans should state in
advance what backup
support will be available to
help those who are quarantined
(eg, who will do their
shopping, pay the bills and
provide financial support in
lieu of lost income).
Governments should have
public discussions of appropriate
levels of compensation
in advance, including who is
responsible for compensation.
Issue 3: Priority setting,
including the allocation of
scarce resources, such as
vaccines and antiviral medicines
1. Governments and the
healthcare sector should publicise a clear rationale
for giving priority access to
healthcare services,
including antivirals and
vaccines, to particular
groups, such as front line
health workers and those in
emergency services. The
decision makers should
initiate and facilitate
constructive public discussion
about these choices.
2. Governments and the
healthcare sector should
engage stakeholders
(including staff, the public
and partners) in determining
what criteria should
be used to make resource
allocation decisions (eg,
access to ventilators during
the crisis, and access to
health services for other
illnesses), should ensure that
clear rationales for allocation
decisions are publicly
accessible and should
provide a justification for
any deviation from the predetermined
criteria.
3. Governments and the
healthcare sector should
ensure that there are formal
mechanisms in place for
stakeholders to bring forward
new information, to appeal
or raise concerns about
particular allocation decisions
and to resolve disputes.
Issue 4: Global governance
implications, such as travel
advisories
1. The World Health Organisation should remain
aware of the impact of travel
recommendations on
affected countries, and
should make every effort to
be as transparent and equitable
as possible when issuing
such recommendations.
2. Federal countries
should utilise whatever
mechanisms are available
within their system of
government to ensure that
relationships within the
country are adequate to
ensure compliance with the
new International Health
Regulations.
3. The developed world
should continue to invest in
the surveillance capacity of
developing countries, and
should also make investments
to further improve
the overall public health
infrastructure of developing
countries.
|