Ethical Reasoning During a Pandemic: Results of a Five Country European Study. Issue 2 (3rd April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Johnson, S. B.; Lucivero, F.; Zimmermann, B. M.; Stendahl, E.; Samuel, G.; Phillips, A.; Hangel, N.
• Is Part Of: AJOB empirical bioethics. Volume 13:Issue 2(2022)
• Page Start: 67
• Page End: 78
• Publication Date: 2022-04-03
• Subjects: Ethics -- qualitative research -- pandemics -- SARS-COV-2 -- COVID-19 -- infectious disease -- moral judgements; Bioethics -- Periodicals; Bioethics -- Research -- Periodicals; Bioethics -- Methodology -- Periodicals; Medical ethics -- Periodicals; 174.205
• DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2022.2040645
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2329-4515

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: There has been no work that identifies the hidden or implicit normative assumptions on which participants base their views during the COVID-19 pandemic, and their reasoning and how they reach moral or ethical judgements. Our analysis focused on participants' moral values, ethical reasoning and normative positions around the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.Methods: We analyzed data from 177 semi-structured interviews across five European countries (Germany, Ireland, Italy, Switzerland and the United Kingdom) conducted in April 2020.Results: Findings are structured in four themes: ethical contention in the context of normative uncertainty; patterns of ethical deliberation when contemplating restrictions and measures to reduce viral transmission; moral judgements regarding "good" and "bad" people; using existing structures of meaning for moral reasoning and ethical judgement.Discussion: Moral tools are an integral part of people's reaction to and experience of a pandemic. 'Moral preparedness' for the next phases of this pandemic and for future pandemics will require an understanding of the moral values and normative concepts citizens use in their own decision-making. Three important elements of this preparedness are: conceptual clarity over what responsibility or respect mean in practice; better understanding of collective mindsets and how to encourage them; and a situated, rather than universalist, approach to the development of normative standards.