A general approach to compensation for losses incurred due to public health interventions in the infectious disease context

Abstract

This paper develops a general approach to how society should compensate for losses that individuals incur due to public health interventions aimed at controlling the spread of infectious diseases. The paper falls in three parts. The first part provides an initial introduction to the issues and briefly outlines five different kinds of public health interventions that will be used as test cases. They are all directed at individuals and aimed at controlling the spread of infectious diseases (1) isolation, (2) quarantine, (3) recommended voluntary social distancing, (4) changes in health care provision for asymptomatic carriers of multi-resistant microorganisms, and (5) vaccination. The interventions will be briefly described including the various risks, burdens and harms individuals who are subject to these interventions may incur. The second part briefly surveys current compensation mechanisms as far as any exist and argue that even where they exist they are clearly insufficient and do not provide adequate compensation. The third part will then develop a general framework for compensation for losses incurred due to public health interventions in the infectious disease context. This is the major analytical and constructive part of the paper. It first analyses pragmatic and ethical arguments supporting the existence of an obligation on the part of the state to compensate for such losses, and then considers whether this obligation can be defeated by (1) resource considerations, or (2) issues relating to personal responsibility.

Ethics, pandemic and environment; looking at the future of low middle income countries

“…by protecting the employment rights of citizens [58], providing financial support to the poor and needy such as daily wagers who might suffer due to shutting down of several industries as a result of lock down orders. However, lack of resources could seriously defeat this argument of compensation in these countries which cannot even provide for the basic health care needs of the people [58]. In Pakistan, it was estimated that between 12.3 million to 18.5 million workers in various industries were at risk of losing their jobs.…”

Effectiveness of the non-pharmaceutical public health interventions against COVID-19; a protocol of a systematic review and realist review

“…Patient isolation, quarantine, lockdown, social distancing, changes in health-care provision (e.g. prioritizing patients for receiving healthcare services in hospitals), mass screening, and vaccination are the most common public health initiatives to control infectious diseases like COVID-19 [34,35]. In the absence of vaccination and effective drugs, non-pharmaceutical PHIs are being considered as the only way to control COVID-19.…”

Infectious Disease: Protecting Workers and Organizations-The Role of Compensation & Benefits

“…3 Gupta and colleagues concluded after studying the economic impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), that "despite somewhat daunting initial costs, quarantine saves both lives and money" (p.393). Holm 4 further portrays the relationship between deploying public health interventions targeting workers of all types, including the self-employed. According to Holm's, 4 "isolation, quarantine, and voluntary social distancing may all cause a loss of earnings for individuals if employers are not willing to continue paying wages for the period when the person is not able to work because of public health interventions" (p.3).…”

“…Holm 4 further portrays the relationship between deploying public health interventions targeting workers of all types, including the self-employed. According to Holm's, 4 "isolation, quarantine, and voluntary social distancing may all cause a loss of earnings for individuals if employers are not willing to continue paying wages for the period when the person is not able to work because of public health interventions" (p.3). Beyond compensation, the employment status of these individuals is also at risk due to the absence of the employee from work.…”

“…Beyond compensation, the employment status of these individuals is also at risk due to the absence of the employee from work. 4 During the SARS outbreak, it was estimated that approximately 3 million individuals in the tourism industry lost their jobs. 5 Even when an ID such as SARS or the current COVID-19, which is novel and has recently been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) 6 is not present, there exist other IDs which are more common such as influenza.…”