Compulsory medical intervention versus external constraint in pandemic control

11Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Would compulsory treatment or vaccination for COVID-19 be justified? In England, there would be significant legal barriers to it. However, we offer a conditional ethical argument in favour of allowing compulsory treatment and vaccination, drawing on an ethical comparison with external constraints - such as quarantine, isolation and 'lockdown' - that have already been authorised to control the pandemic in this jurisdiction. We argue that, if the permissive English approach to external constraints for COVID-19 has been justified, then there is a case for a similarly permissive approach to compulsory medical interventions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Douglas, T., Forsberg, L., & Pugh, J. (2021). Compulsory medical intervention versus external constraint in pandemic control. Journal of Medical Ethics, 47(12), E77. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106435

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free