Pinning Down the Hypothetical. Pandemic Preparedness since the 1990s – Historical, Ethical and Legal Preconditions of Managing Corona Virus Response

确定假设。

• 批准号: 458544411
• 负责人: Professorin Dr. Cornelia Rauh
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Institut für Ethik, Geschichte und Philosophie der Medizin
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 资助国家: 德国
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/458544411?language=en
• 关键词: Pinning; Down; Hypothetical.; Pandemic; Preparedness

The "age of immunity" (Thießen) came to an end at the latest in the 1980s. As the flip side, so to speak, of a new phase of globalization, the perception of pandemigenic viruses as a threat to health, the economy, prosperity, and security increased. At the same time, contagion control, in many cases historically verifiable, was never accompanied by medical and hygienic consequences only, but always by—more or less far-reaching—political, social, economic, ethical, and legal ones as well. The pandemic plans that have been advanced since the 1990s were therefore directed at a field of action founded in epidemiology in a complex future contingent on numerous uncertainties. Hence both the World Health Organization (WHO) as well as responsible authorities in the Federal Republic of Germany attempted to plan for a pandemic future. These plans were readjusted following the outbreak of every new pandemic (e.g., the avian influenza in 2003). Who participated in the pandemic plans, the use of what resources the plans were based on, what public health measures were projected, what perspectives were included or excluded, what social segments were taken into account; and the values, such as equity, health, or the relationship between community and individual the plans were based on, are key issues in a historical approach as well as in ethical and legal considerations.The current Corona crisis reveals the limitations of the attempt to draw up plans for the hypothetical. It has become apparent that it is not just a matter of the ability of the healthcare system to respond, but that other—previously unconsidered—social segments are also important. In current debates, one of the key issues is what is system-relevant in the crisis.The aim of PreCoM is to understand the genesis of pandemic plans on an international (WHO) and national (Germany) level and to ask what had been taken into consideration in advance with respect to norms and values. Tying into this, PreCoM analyzes decisions as well as the associated legal and ethical ambivalences during the current Corona crisis and develops perspectives for future pandemic plans. This also includes a debate over the genesis and validity of values and rights. The historical subprojects draw on the values relevant for pandemic planning as identified and specified more precisely in the ethical and legal subprojects. Hence it is about both: historically deducing values and the understanding of the law (e.g., autonomy, equity, solidarity, responsibility) and at the same time reflecting on how these values and rights are taken into account, negotiated, applied, ignored, or argued in the current pandemic debate by political, legal and public health decision-makers. The strength of PreCoM lies precisely in the consolidation of different ways of accessing pandemic plans—a review of past plans, a contemporary analysis, and future recommendations.

“豁免时代”最迟在20世纪80年代结束。可以说，作为全球化新阶段的另一面，人们越来越多地认为大流行病毒对健康、经济、繁荣和安全构成威胁。与此同时，传染病控制--在许多情况下历史上可以核实--从来不只伴随着医疗和卫生后果，而总是--或多或少具有深远影响--也伴随着政治、社会、经济、伦理和法律后果。因此，自1990年代以来提出的大流行病计划针对的是流行病学在一个复杂的未来、取决于许多不确定因素的行动领域。因此，世界卫生组织(世卫组织)和德意志联邦共和国的负责当局都试图为大流行的未来制定计划。在每一次新的大流行(如2003年的禽流感)爆发后，这些计划都进行了调整。谁参与了大流行计划，计划基于什么资源，计划基于什么公共卫生措施，包括或排除了哪些视角，考虑了哪些社会部分；以及计划所基于的价值观，如公平、健康或社区与个人之间的关系，这些都是历史方法以及伦理和法律考虑中的关键问题。目前的日冕危机揭示了为假设的情况制定计划的尝试的局限性。很明显，这不仅仅是医疗体系的应对能力问题，其他以前没有考虑过的社会部分也很重要。在当前的辩论中，关键问题之一是在危机中什么是系统相关的。预防流行病管理的目的是在国际(世卫组织)和国家(德国)层面上了解大流行计划的起源，并询问事先在规范和价值观方面考虑了什么。结合这一点，PreCoM分析了当前日冕危机期间的决策以及相关的法律和道德矛盾，并为未来的大流行计划制定了前景。这还包括一场关于价值观和权利的起源和有效性的辩论。历史上的次级项目借鉴了伦理和法律次级项目中更准确地确定和规定的与大流行病规划有关的价值观。因此，它既关乎历史，又关乎价值观和对法律的理解(例如，自治、公平、团结、责任)，同时反思政治、法律和公共卫生决策者如何在当前的大流行病辩论中考虑、谈判、适用、忽视或辩论这些价值观和权利。PreCoM的优势恰恰在于整合了获取大流行计划的不同方式--回顾过去的计划、当代的分析和未来的建议。