Workshop on Public Health Law and Ethics I & II: The Challenge of Public/Private Partnerships (PPPs)

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (S4) ◽  
pp. 90-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Reich ◽  
Jody Henry Hershey ◽  
George E. Hardy ◽  
James F. Childress ◽  
Ruth Gaare Bernheim
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
University Of Minnesota ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Law And Ethics ◽  
Public Health Officials ◽  
The University ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

The issue of public health ethics has received much attention in recent years and is seen as a new field, distinct from medical ethics. Faculty from the University of Virginia, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Georgetown University, the University of Minnesota, and others received a grant from the Greenwall Foundation to examine this new field of public health ethics and identify the unique principles that distinguish it from the study of medical ethics. In the course of that study, which included exploring the field with public health practitioners, a number of distinguishing ethical principles emerged. The moral principles appropriate for public health officials included producing benefits; avoiding, preventing and removing harms; producing a maximum balance of benefits over harms; and distributing benefits and burdens fairly.

scholarly journals Variability in public health ethics education in EUPHA and ASPHER members

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Butcher ◽  
P Schröder-Bäck ◽  
F Tahzib
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Ethics Education ◽  
Ethics Training ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Public Health Professionals ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Background Public health professionals face decisions that have far-reaching ethical implications. Despite this, the field of public health ethics is relatively new, and teaching and training in ethics for public health professionals is “highly variable in quantity and content” [Doudenkova et al 2017]. Building on a prior body of research, surveys of ASPHER and EUPHA members were undertaken to explore current levels of ethics education. Methods Online surveys were distributed to ASPHER and EUPHA members with the aims of a) exploring the current status of ethics education in public health courses in ASPHER institutions and b) understanding the ethics education of individual public health practitioners in EUPHA. Results The ASPHER survey was completed by teaching staff at 35 different institutions between April and August 2019. The EUPHA survey was completed by 232 professionals between October 2019 and January 2020. ASPHER Survey: 39% (n = 12) of institutions awarding master's degrees in public health had one or more degrees in which no ethics was taught. Only 48% (n = 13) of institutions had someone in their academic team formally qualified to teach ethics by holding a master's degree, PhD or further academic role in ethics. EUPHA Survey: Despite 79% (n = 165) of respondents encountering ethical dilemmas on at least a monthly basis, 21% (n = 48) reported that they had never had any ethics education or training, and 50% (n = 101) respondents thought that they had too little training in ethics for their professional role. Conclusions There remains a significant proportion of those studying or working in public health who do not receive any public health ethics training or education. Key messages Ethics education in public health remains variable among ASPHER organisations and EUPHA members, a significant minority lacking any ethics training. To ensure ethically reflective and sensitive public health practitioners, access to ethics education is key.

Ethical principles and ethical issues in public health

2021 ◽  
pp. 261-272
Author(s):  
Nancy Kass ◽  
Amy Paul ◽  
Andrew Siegel
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Health Practice ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
1960S And 1970S ◽  
Social Justice Theory

Public health ethics considers moral dimensions of public health practice and research. While medical ethics dates back hundreds of years, and bioethics writings emerged in the 1960s and 1970s, ‘public health ethics’, articulated as such, did not appear significantly in the literature for several more decades. There has been great interest recently in defining public health ethics, examining how it resembles or differs from medical ethics or bioethics, outlining frameworks and codes, and providing conceptual and practical guidance on how ethics can inform public health practice and research. This chapter describes the emergence of public health ethics; work in bioethics with relevance for public health; the relevance of social justice theory in addressing public health problems; and discusses literature on ethics and public health research, including whether public health research ethics might differ from ethical guidance for other human research. The chapter concludes with an overview of ethics issues related to genetic research and emerging technologies.

Public Health Ethics

2020 ◽  
pp. 233-251
Author(s):  
James F. Childress ◽  
Ruth R. Faden ◽  
Ruth D. Gaare [Bernheim] ◽  
Lawrence O. Gostin ◽  
Jeffrey Kahn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Health Policy ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Health Policy And Practice ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

This chapter, which grew out of a Greenwall Foundation–funded working group of a dozen or so ethicists, lawyers, and public health practitioners, provides a rough conceptual map of the terrain of public health ethics. It examines the nature of public health and public health interventions, and it identifies a number of general moral considerations (principles) relevant to public health policy and practice and often, especially as articulated in basic human rights, promotive of public health. Because these moral considerations are general and broad, they require specification and weighting. In cases of conflict, five “justificatory conditions” need to be met: effectiveness, proportionality, necessity, least infringement, and public justification. These conditions help to determine whether protecting or promoting public health warrants overriding individual liberty in particular situations.

Public Health Ethics Theory: Review and Path to Convergence

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Clinical Model ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners ◽  
Ethical Tools ◽  
Theory Review

For over 100 years, the field of contemporary public health has existed to improve the health of communities and populations. As public health practitioners conduct their work – be it focused on preventing transmission of infectious diseases, or prevention of injury, or prevention of and cures for chronic conditions – ethical dimensions arise. Borrowing heavily from the ethical tools developed for research ethics and bioethics, the nascent field of public health ethics soon began to feel the limits of the clinical model and began creating different frameworks to guide its ethical challenges. Several public health ethics frameworks have been introduced since the late 1990s, ranging from extensions of principle-based models to human rights and social justice perspectives to those based on political philosophy. None has coalesced as the framework of choice in the discipline of public health. This paper examines several of the most-known frameworks of public health ethics for their common theoretical underpinnings and values, and suggests next steps toward the formulation of a single framework.

scholarly journals From General Principles to Procedural Values: Responsible Digital Health Meets Public Health Ethics

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rune Nyrup
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Ethical Decision Making ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Digital Ethics ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Accountability For Reasonableness ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Procedural Values

Most existing work in digital ethics is modeled on the “principlist” approach to medical ethics, seeking to articulate a small set of general principles to guide ethical decision-making. Critics have highlighted several limitations of such principles, including (1) that they mask ethical disagreements between and within stakeholder communities, and (2) that they provide little guidance for how to resolve trade-offs between different values. This paper argues that efforts to develop responsible digital health practices could benefit from paying closer attention to a different branch of medical ethics, namely public health ethics. In particular, I argue that the influential “accountability for reasonableness” (A4R) approach to public health ethics can help overcome some of the limitations of existing digital ethics principles. A4R seeks to resolve trade-offs through decision-procedures designed according to certain shared procedural values. This allows stakeholders to recognize decisions reached through these procedures as legitimate, despite their underlying disagreements. I discuss the prospects for adapting A4R to the context of responsible digital health and suggest questions for further research.

An Overview of Ethics and Environmental Health

2019 ◽  
pp. 697-703
Author(s):  
David B. Resnik
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Environmental Health ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Biomedical Ethics ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Social Utility ◽  
Toxic Substances ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Wide Range

This chapter provides an overview of the ethics of environmental health, and it introduces five chapters in the related section of The Oxford Handbook of Public Health Ethics. A wide range of ethical issues arises in managing the relationship between human health and the environment, including regulation of toxic substances, air and water pollution, waste management, agriculture, the built environment, occupational health, energy production and use, environmental justice, population control, and climate change. The values at stake in environmental health ethics include those usually mentioned in ethical debates in biomedicine and public health, such as autonomy, social utility, and justice, as well as values that address environmental concerns, such as animal welfare, stewardship of biological resources, and sustainability. Environmental health ethics, therefore, stands at the crossroads of several disciplines, including public health ethics, environmental ethics, biomedical ethics, and business ethics.

An Overview of the Ethics of Injury in Public Health

2019 ◽  
pp. 597-603
Author(s):  
Adnan A. Hyder
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Injury Prevention ◽  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Prompt Attention ◽  
And Control

This chapter briefly introduces ethics issues in injury prevention and control in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), using a series of examples that prompt attention to the ethical principles of autonomy and justice. The chapter also introduces the section of The Oxford Handbook of Public Health Ethics dedicated to an examination of injury and public health ethics, with attention given to the complex ethical challenges arising in injury prevention and control in LMICs. The section’s two chapters discuss public health ethics issues arising in the prevention and control of unintentional injuries and intentional injuries, respectively. Those chapters define a set of ethics issues within international injury work and provide an initial analysis of the nature of those ethics issues, their specificity, and potential pathways for addressing them.

scholarly journals Innovative methods in teaching public health ethics. The need to adapt to the new times: from challenge to opportunity

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Buron Pust ◽  
A Segura
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Teaching Strategies ◽  
Flipped Classroom ◽  
Role Playing ◽  
Public Health Ethics ◽  
Master Of Public Health ◽  
Health Ethics ◽  
Parliamentary Debate ◽  
Massive Online Open Courses ◽  
Open Courses

Abstract Background Public Health Ethics (PHE) has been taught first as optional and later as a mandatory subject in the Master of Public Health in Barcelona for about 6 years. During these years, professors have adapted the methodology to make it more attractive and to maximize students' participation and time spent debating and practicing moral reasoning. Objectives To showcase 3 different teaching strategies or methods, presenting for each of them: resources required, outcomes so far in terms of satisfaction and exam performance, as well as the pros and cons from the teacher's perspective. Results Flipped-classroom strategy: theoretical content is delivered outside the classroom, and the practice into the classroom. Works well but needs incentives for compliance in reading. Versatile debating Methods: from parliamentary debate, to role-playing, online debate, etc. Depending on the Case-study, some work better than others; in the online they practice written deliberation skills, but it is important to set rules. MOOC: Massive Online Open Courses in PHE. Can be used as independent teaching material, it is a great tool to introduce PHE into other PH areas and non-teaching environments. Conclusions So far, these methods have proven to increase students' motivation and engagement in Public Health Ethics. Key messages Practising reflection and debating skills is an essential part of PHE. Modern teaching strategies, more interactive and online-based, can help maximising the time spent in these activities. Although challenging and time-consuming at first, these methods also increase students' interest in PHE.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document