Ethical questions identified in a study of local and expatriate responders' perspectives of vulnerability in the 2010 Haiti earthquake.

BACKGROUND: Situations of disaster that prompt international humanitarian responses are rife with ethical tensions. The 2010 Haiti earthquake caused great destruction and prompted a massive humanitarian response. The widespread needs experienced by the population and the scale of the response inevitably rendered priority-setting difficult, and gave rise to ethical challenges. PURPOSE: This paper presents four ethical questions identified in the analysis of a study on vulnerability and equity in the humanitarian response to the 2010 Haiti earthquake. METHODS: Using interpretive description methodology, the interdisciplinary research team analysed 24 semi-structured in-depth interviews conducted with expatriate and Haitian health workers and decision-makers involved in the response. RESULTS: Ethical questions identified through the analysis were: (1) How should limited resources be allocated in situations of widespread vulnerability and elevated needs? (2) At what point does it become ethically problematic to expend (considerable) resources to sustain expatriate disaster responders? (3) How ought rapid and reactive interventions be balanced with more deliberated and coordinated approaches? (4) What trade-offs are justified when interventions to address acute needs could contribute to long-term vulnerabilities? DISCUSSION: The questions arise in light of an immense gap between available resources and widespread and elevated needs. This gap is likely unavoidable in large-scale crises and may be a source of ethical distress for both local and international responders. The analysis of ethical questions associated with crisis response can advance discussions about how relief efforts can best be designed and implemented to minimise ethical distress and improve assistance to local populations.

The securitization of health in the context of the war on terror. National security and global health: the conflict of imperatives.

In this article, I want to show that the securitization of health issues in the name of national interests led to the militarization of health care in the context of the war against terrorism. However, the connection between health and security also gave way to the emergence of the notion of human security, thus, converging with the human right to health approach and the cosmopolitan discourse on global health. These two perspectives on the relation between health and security lead to conflicting imperatives in the current state of counter-terrorism operations. I argue that when the securitization of health concerns in the name of national security conflicts with the provision of health care in the name of universal human rights, the higher moral end must trump the prudential one. Moreover, it is a duty to promote the human right to health when liberal democracies in foreign policies directly violate this moral ideal in the name of national security.

Global health and national borders: the ethics of foreign aid in a time of financial crisis.

BACKGROUND: The governments and citizens of the developed nations are increasingly called upon to contribute financially to health initiatives outside their borders. Although international development assistance for health has grown rapidly over the last two decades, austerity measures related to the 2008 and 2011 global financial crises may impact negatively on aid expenditures. The competition between national priorities and foreign aid commitments raises important ethical questions for donor nations. This paper aims to foster individual reflection and public debate on donor responsibilities for global health. METHODS: We undertook a critical review of contemporary accounts of justice. We selected theories that: (i) articulate important and widely held moral intuitions; (ii) have had extensive impact on debates about global justice; (iii) represent diverse approaches to moral reasoning; and (iv) present distinct stances on the normative importance of national borders. Due to space limitations we limit the discussion to four frameworks. RESULTS: Consequentialist, relational, human rights, and social contract approaches were considered. Responsibilities to provide international assistance were seen as significant by all four theories and place limits on the scope of acceptable national autonomy. Among the range of potential aid foci, interventions for health enjoyed consistent prominence. The four theories concur that there are important ethical responsibilities to support initiatives to improve the health of the worst off worldwide, but offer different rationales for intervention and suggest different implicit limits on responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant theoretical disagreements, four influential accounts of justice offer important reasons to support many current initiatives to promote global health. Ethical argumentation can complement pragmatic reasons to support global health interventions and provide an important foundation to strengthen collective action.

Global solidarity, migration and global health inequity.

The grounds for global solidarity have been theorized and conceptualized in recent years, and many have argued that we need a global concept of solidarity. But the question remains: what can motivate efforts of the international community and nation-states? Our focus is the grounding of solidarity with respect to global inequities in health. We explore what considerations could motivate acts of global solidarity in the specific context of health migration, and sketch briefly what form this kind of solidarity could take. First, we argue that the only plausible conceptualization of persons highlights their interdependence. We draw upon a conception of persons as 'ecological subjects' and from there illustrate what such a conception implies with the example of nurses migrating from low and middle-income countries to more affluent ones. Next, we address potential critics who might counter any such understanding of current international politics with a reference to real-politik and the insights of realist international political theory. We argue that national governments--while not always or even often motivated by moral reasons alone--may nevertheless be motivated to acts of global solidarity by prudential arguments. Solidarity then need not be, as many argue, a function of charitable inclination, or emergent from an acknowledgment of injustice suffered, but may in fact serve national and transnational interests. We conclude on a positive note: global solidarity may be conceptualized to helpfully address global health inequity, to the extent that personal and transnational interdependence are enough to motivate national governments into action.

Structural Injustices in Our Nonideal World.

Madison Powers and Ruth Faden's book Structural Injustice: Power, Advantage, and Human Rights (Oxford University Press, 2019), is an invaluable contribution to help us grasp the contemporary ills of our nonideal world. The authors' general claim is that the concept of structural injustice allows us to identify the causes and social processes leading to the violation of human rights and the production of unfair systems of disadvantage and privilege. Building on Powers and Faden's well-known thesis that social justice is concerned with the achievement of a sufficient level of well-being, the book delves into an in-depth discussion of their conceptual framework, incorporating concrete examples to illustrate their analysis.

Pandemic Surveillance and Racialized Subpopulations: Mitigating Vulnerabilities in COVID-19 Apps.

Debates about effective responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have emphasized the paramount importance of digital tracing technology in suppressing the disease. So far, discussions about the ethics of this technology have focused on privacy concerns, efficacy, and uptake. However, important issues regarding power imbalances and vulnerability also warrant attention. As demonstrated in other forms of digital surveillance, vulnerable subpopulations pay a higher price for surveillance measures. There is reason to worry that some types of COVID-19 technology might lead to the employment of disproportionate profiling, policing, and criminalization of marginalized groups. It is, thus, of crucial importance to interrogate vulnerability in COVID-19 apps and ensure that the development, implementation, and data use of this surveillance technology avoids exacerbating vulnerability and the risk of harm to surveilled subpopulations, while maintaining the benefits of data collection across the whole population. This paper outlines the major challenges and a set of values that should be taken into account when implementing disease surveillance technology in the pandemic response.

Understanding and Addressing Vulnerability Following the 2010 Haiti Earthquake: Applying a Feminist Lens to Examine Perspectives of Haitian and Expatriate Health Care Providers and Decision-Makers.

Vulnerability is a central concept in humanitarian aid. Discussions of vulnerability in disaster response literature and guidelines for humanitarian aid range from considerations of a universal human vulnerability, to more nuanced examinations of how particular characteristics render individuals more or less at risk. Despite its frequent use, there is a lack of clarity about how vulnerability is conceptualized and how it informs operational priorities in humanitarian assistance. Guided by interpretive description methodology, we draw on the feminist taxonomy of vulnerability presented by Mackenzie, Rogers and Dodds (2014) to examine perspectives of 24 expatriate and Haitian decision-makers and health professionals interviewed between May 2012 and March 2013. The analysis explores concepts of vulnerability and equity in relation to the humanitarian response following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti. Participants' conceptualizations of vulnerability included consideration for inherent vulnerabilities related to individual characteristics (e.g. being a woman or disabled) and situational vulnerabilities related to particular circumstances such as having less access to health care resources or basic necessities. Participants recognized that vulnerabilities could be exacerbated by socio-political structures but felt ill-equipped to address these. The use of the taxonomy and a set of questions inspired by Hurst's (2008) approach to identifying and reducing vulnerability can guide the analysis of varied sources of vulnerability and open discussions about how and by whom vulnerabilities should be addressed in humanitarian responses. More research is required to inform how humanitarian responders could balance addressing acute vulnerability with consideration of systemic and pre-existing circumstances that underlie much of the vulnerability experienced following an acute disaster.

Haitian and international responders' and decision-makers' perspectives regarding disability and the response to the 2010 Haiti earthquake.

BACKGROUND: Following disasters, persons with disabilities (PWD) are especially vulnerable to harm, yet they have commonly been excluded from disaster planning, and their needs have been poorly addressed during disaster relief. Following the 2010 Haiti earthquake, thousands of individuals experienced acute injuries. Many more individuals with preexisting disabilities experienced heightened vulnerability related to considerations including safety, access to services, and meeting basic needs. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research was to better understand the perceptions of responders and decision-makers regarding disability and efforts to address the needs of PWD following the 2010 earthquake. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study using interpretive description methodology and semistructured interviews with 14 Haitian and 10 international participants who were involved in the earthquake response. RESULTS: Participants identified PWD as being among the most vulnerable individuals following the earthquake. Though some forms of disability received considerable attention in aid efforts, the needs of other PWD did not. Several factors were identified as challenges for efforts to address the needs of PWD including lack of coordination and information sharing, the involvement of multiple aid sectors, perceptions that this should be the responsibility of specialized organizations, and the need to prioritize limited resources. Participants also reported shifts in local social views related to disability following the earthquake. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing the needs of PWD following a disaster is a crucial population health challenge and raises questions related to equity and responsibility for non-governmental organizations, governments, and local communities.