Disability and COVID-19: improving legal and policy responses through grassroots disability ethics

Ivanka Antova

doi:10.53386/nilq.v72is1.903

Disability and COVID-19: improving legal and policy responses through grassroots disability ethics

Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly ◽

10.53386/nilq.v72is1.903 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 72 (S1) ◽

pp. 91-116

Author(s):

Ivanka Antova

Keyword(s):

Health Policy ◽

Disabled People ◽

Policy Responses ◽

Grassroots Level

The emergency legal and policy responses to COVID-19 attempt to avoid discrimination against disabled people. But they do not address deeper ableist and disableist narratives and practices embedded in emergency health policy. Adopting a disability ethics approach to the guidelines that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic shows that they rest on dubious ethical grounds. However, emergency legal and policy responses to COVID-19 can be improved by adopting an approach based on disability ethics principles that emerge from grassroots level.

Download Full-text

Policy responses to COVID-19 present a window of opportunity for a paradigm shift in global health policy: An application of the Multiple Streams Framework as a heuristic

Global Public Health ◽

10.1080/17441692.2021.1925942 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-11

Author(s):

Michelle M. Amri ◽

Dilani Logan

Keyword(s):

Health Policy ◽

Global Health ◽

Paradigm Shift ◽

Window Of Opportunity ◽

Multiple Streams ◽

Policy Responses ◽

Global Health Policy ◽

Multiple Streams Framework

Download Full-text

Bioethics, Adaptive Preferences, and Judging the Quality of a Life with Disability

Social Theory and Practice ◽

10.5840/soctheorpract202121117 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 47 (1) ◽

pp. 199-220

Author(s):

Joseph A. Stramondo ◽

Keyword(s):

Health Policy ◽

Clinical Ethics ◽

Well Being ◽

Status Quo ◽

The Self ◽

Disabled People ◽

Self Assessment ◽

Adaptive Preferences ◽

The Status

Both mainstream and disability bioethics sometimes contend that the self-assessment of disabled people about their own well-being is distorted by adaptive preferences that are only held because other, better options are unavailable. I will argue that both of the most common ways of understanding adaptive preferences—the autonomy-based account and the well-being account—would reject blanket claims that disabled people’s QOL self-assessment has been distorted, whether those claims come from mainstream bioethicists or from disability bioethicists. However, rejecting these generalizations for a more nuanced view still has dramatic implications for the status quo in both health policy and clinical ethics.

Download Full-text

UK-wide health policy under the Coalition

Dismantling the NHS? ◽

10.1332/policypress/9781447330226.003.0007 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

David Hughes

Keyword(s):

Health Policy ◽

Northern Ireland ◽

Health Services ◽

Policy Making ◽

Social Care ◽

The Other ◽

Executive Orders ◽

Health Reforms ◽

Policy Responses ◽

Health And Social Care

A volume on health reforms under the Coalition must necessarily expand its focus beyond Westminster to consider the larger UK policy context. Legislation enacted in 1998 established devolved assemblies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland with power to make law or issue executive orders in certain specified areas, including health services. This meant that an English NHS overseen by the Westminster Parliament now existed alongside separate NHS systems accountable to devolved governments in the other UK countries. Thus, the major Coalition health reforms heralded by the Health and Social Care Act 2012 applied in the main to England only. However, devolved administrations needed to formulate appropriate policy responses that either maintained differences or moved closer to the English policies. This chapter describes the divergent approaches between the four UK NHS systems, but also sheds light on the nature of coalition policy making.

Download Full-text