Two public health conflicts during the pandemic

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic saw unprecedented responses to the allocation of scarce and insufficient triage resources and to the difficulties in establishing containment measures, which oscillated between suggestive, persuasive and coercive. Classical triage criteria were replaced by extreme utilitarianism based on objectively evaluated medical criteria to privilege the critically ill with a recoverable prognosis by applying extreme support and treatment measures. Mandatory containment measures and the call for vaccination failed to achieve convincing scientific support; applied irregularly and plagued by uncertainties and insecurities, they affected disadvantaged groups and caused public outcry and disrespect. Triage based on utilitarian medical criteria caused distress and serious mental strains in medical decision-makers and members of ad hoc committees. These experiences suggest renewing the individualistic and elitist bioethical discourse to privilege the common good over individual interests.