scholarly journals Digital Afterlife in L. Floridi’s Infosphere Concept (Ethical Analysis)

Manuscript ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 2675-2679
Author(s):  
Yuliya Vladimirovna Nazarova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Jacob Busch ◽  
Emilie Kirstine Madsen ◽  
Antoinette Mary Fage-Butler ◽  
Marianne Kjær ◽  
Loni Ledderer

Summary Nudging has been discussed in the context of public health, and ethical issues raised by nudging in public health contexts have been highlighted. In this article, we first identify types of nudging approaches and techniques that have been used in screening programmes, and ethical issues that have been associated with nudging: paternalism, limited autonomy and manipulation. We then identify nudging techniques used in a pamphlet developed for the Danish National Screening Program for Colorectal Cancer. These include framing, default nudge, use of hassle bias, authority nudge and priming. The pamphlet and the very offering of a screening programme can in themselves be considered nudges. Whether nudging strategies are ethically problematic depend on whether they are categorized as educative- or non-educative nudges. Educative nudges seek to affect people’s choice making by engaging their reflective capabilities. Non-educative nudges work by circumventing people’s reflective capabilities. Information materials are, on the face of it, meant to engage citizens’ reflective capacities. Recipients are likely to receive information materials with this expectation, and thus not expect to be affected in other ways. Non-educative nudges may therefore be particularly problematic in the context of information on screening, also as participating in screening does not always benefit the individual.


Author(s):  
Katja Voit ◽  
Cristian Timmermann ◽  
Florian Steger

This paper aims to analyze the ethical challenges in experimental drug use during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, using Germany as a case study. In Germany uniform ethical guidelines were available early on nationwide, which was considered as desirable by other states to reduce uncertainties and convey a message of unity. The purpose of this ethical analysis is to assist the preparation of future guidelines on the use of medicines during public health emergencies. The use of hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir and COVID-19 convalescent plasma in clinical settings was analyzed from the perspective of the ethical principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and autonomy. We observed that drug safety and drug distribution during the pandemic affects all four ethical principles. We therefore recommend to establish ethical guidelines (i) to discuss experimental treatment options with patients from all population groups who are in urgent need, (ii) to facilitate the recording of patient reactions to drugs in off-label use, (iii) to expand inclusion criteria for clinical studies to avoid missing potentially negative effects on excluded groups, and (iv) to maintain sufficient access to repurposed drugs for patients with prior conditions.


2003 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruthie Robinson
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Ian D. Wolfe ◽  
Angira Patel ◽  
Larry K. Kociolek ◽  
Asma Fazal ◽  
Ravi Jhaveri ◽  
...  

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 113
Author(s):  
Meta Rus ◽  
Urh Groselj

Although vaccination is recognised as the top public health achievement of the twentieth century, unequivocal consensus about its beneficence does not exist among the general population. In countries with well-established immunisation programmes, vaccines are “victims of their own success”, because low incidences of diseases now prevented with vaccines diminished the experience of their historical burdens. Increasing number of vaccine-hesitant people in recent years threatens, or even effectively disables, herd immunity levels of the population and results in outbreaks of previously already controlled diseases. We aimed to apply a framework for ethical analysis of vaccination in childhood based on the four principles of biomedical ethics (respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence and justice) to provide a comprehensive and applicable model on how to address the ethical aspects of vaccination at both individual and societal levels. We suggest finding an “ethical equilibrium”, which means that the degree of respect for parents’ autonomy is not constant, but variable; it shall depend on the level of established herd immunity and it is specific for every society. When the moral obligation of individuals to contribute to herd immunity is not fulfilled, mandatory vaccination policies are ethically justified, because states bear responsibility to protect herd immunity as a common good.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document