FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3163324241> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3163324241 endingPage "350" @default.
• W3163324241 startingPage "340" @default.
• W3163324241 abstract "Purpose Current covid-19 pandemic challenges health-care ethics. Ones of the most important challenges are medical resources allocation and a duty to treat, often addressed to medical personnel. This paper suggests that there are good reasons to rethink our health-care ethics for future global catastrophic risks. Current pandemic shows how challenging can be an issue of resources allocation even in a relatively small kind of catastrophic event such as covid-19 pandemic. In this paper, the authors show that any future existential bigger catastrophe may require new guidelines for the allocation of medical resources. The idea of assisted dying is considered as a hypothetical scenario. Design/methodology/approach This is a conceptual work based on conceptual analysis at the intersection of risk studies, health-care ethics and future studies. This study builds the argument on the assumption that the covid-19 pandemic should be treated as a sort of global catastrophic risk. Findings show that there are no such attempts in currently published peer-reviewed academic literature. This is crucial concept for the meta-analysis. This study shows why and how current pandemic can be interpreted in terms of global catastrophic risk even if, literally, covid-19 does not meet all criteria required in the risk studies to be called a global catastrophe. Findings We can expect an emergence of discriminatory selection policy which will require some actions taken by future patients like, for example, genetic engineering. But even then it is inevitable that there will still be a large number of survivors who require medical assistance, which they have no chance of receiving. This is why this study has considered the concept of assisted dying understood as an official protocol for health-care ethics and resources allocation policy in the case of emergency situations. Possibly more controversial idea discussed in this paper is an idea of assisted dying for those who cannot receive required medical help. Such procedure could be applied in a mass-scale during a global catastrophic event. Research limitations/implications Philosophers and ethicists should identify and study all possible pros and cons of this discrimination rule. As this study’s findings suggested above, a reliable point of reference is the concept of substantial human enhancement. Human enhancement as such, widely debated, should be studied in that specific context of discrimination of patients in an access to limited medical resources. Last but not least, scientific community should study the concept of assisted dying which could be applied for those survivors who have no chance of obtaining medical care. Such criteria and concepts as cost-benefit analysis, the ethics of quality of life, autonomy of patients and duty of medical personnel should be considered. Practical implications Politicians and policymakers should prepare protocols for global catastrophes where these discrimination criteria would have to be applied. The same applies to the development of medical robotics aimed at replacing human health-care personnel. We assume that this is important implication for practical policy in healthcare. Our prediction, however plausible, is not a good scenario for humanity. But given this realistic development trajectory, we should do everything possible to prevent the need for the discriminatory rules in medical care described above. Originality/value This study offers the idea of assisted dying as a health-care policy in emergency situations. The authors expect that next future global catastrophes – looking at the current pandemic only as a mild prelude – will force a radical change in moral values and medical standards. New criteria of selection and discrimination will be perceived as much more exclusivist and unfair than criteria applied today." @default.
• W3163324241 created "2021-05-24" @default.
• W3163324241 creator A5053805357 @default.
• W3163324241 creator A5074785339 @default.
• W3163324241 date "2021-05-15" @default.
• W3163324241 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W3163324241 title "Covid-19 pandemic and future global catastrophic risks as a challenge for health-care ethics" @default.
• W3163324241 cites W1947700154 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2009337674 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2009377299 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2010569934 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2131088495 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2138064535 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2547693695 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2739441969 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2789287982 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2885649671 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2912908653 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2950153650 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W2993162735 @default.
• W3163324241 cites W3124113172 @default.
• W3163324241 doi "https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhrh-12-2020-0107" @default.
• W3163324241 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W3163324241 type Work @default.
• W3163324241 sameAs 3163324241 @default.
• W3163324241 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3163324241 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3163324241 hasAuthorship W3163324241A5053805357 @default.
• W3163324241 hasAuthorship W3163324241A5074785339 @default.
• W3163324241 hasBestOaLocation W31633242411 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C112930515 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C2779134260 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C3008058167 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C46578552 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C524204448 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C539667460 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C89623803 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C112930515 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C126322002 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C142724271 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C160735492 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C162324750 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C17744445 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C199539241 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C2779134260 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C3008058167 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C46578552 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C524204448 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C539667460 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C71924100 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C89623803 @default.
• W3163324241 hasConceptScore W3163324241C98184364 @default.
• W3163324241 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W3163324241 hasLocation W31633242411 @default.
• W3163324241 hasOpenAccess W3163324241 @default.
• W3163324241 hasPrimaryLocation W31633242411 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W3103289217 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W3106370311 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W3108360120 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W3119540162 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W3152606407 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W3152916563 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W4313474620 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W4327956415 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W4381432928 @default.
• W3163324241 hasRelatedWork W4381942459 @default.
• W3163324241 hasVolume "15" @default.
• W3163324241 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3163324241 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3163324241 magId "3163324241" @default.
• W3163324241 workType "article" @default.