Cargando…

Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control

This paper explores the notion of reciprocity in the context of active pulmonary and laryngeal tuberculosis (TB) treatment and related control policies and practices. We seek to do three things: First, we sketch the background to contemporary global TB care and suggest that poverty is a key feature...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silva, Diego S., Dawson, Angus, Upshur, Ross E.G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4823342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26797512
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9691-z
_version_ 1782425895908147200
author Silva, Diego S.
Dawson, Angus
Upshur, Ross E.G.
author_facet Silva, Diego S.
Dawson, Angus
Upshur, Ross E.G.
author_sort Silva, Diego S.
collection PubMed
description This paper explores the notion of reciprocity in the context of active pulmonary and laryngeal tuberculosis (TB) treatment and related control policies and practices. We seek to do three things: First, we sketch the background to contemporary global TB care and suggest that poverty is a key feature when considering the treatment of TB patients. We use two examples from TB care to explore the role of reciprocity: isolation and the use of novel TB drugs. Second, we explore alternative means of justifying the use of reciprocity through appeal to different moral and political theoretical traditions (i.e., virtue ethics, deontology, and consequentialism). We suggest that each theory can be used to provide reasons to take reciprocity seriously as an independent moral concept, despite any other differences. Third, we explore general meanings and uses of the concept of reciprocity, with the primary intention of demonstrating that it cannot be simply reduced to other more frequently invoked moral concepts such as beneficence or justice. We argue that reciprocity can function as a mid-level principle in public health, and generally, captures a core social obligation arising once an individual or group is burdened as a result of acting for the benefit of others (even if they derive a benefit themselves). We conclude that while more needs to be explored in relation to the theoretical justification and application of reciprocity, sufficient arguments can be made for it to be taken more seriously as a key principle within public health ethics and bioethics more generally.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4823342
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48233422016-04-20 Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control Silva, Diego S. Dawson, Angus Upshur, Ross E.G. J Bioeth Inq Symposium: Tuberculosis This paper explores the notion of reciprocity in the context of active pulmonary and laryngeal tuberculosis (TB) treatment and related control policies and practices. We seek to do three things: First, we sketch the background to contemporary global TB care and suggest that poverty is a key feature when considering the treatment of TB patients. We use two examples from TB care to explore the role of reciprocity: isolation and the use of novel TB drugs. Second, we explore alternative means of justifying the use of reciprocity through appeal to different moral and political theoretical traditions (i.e., virtue ethics, deontology, and consequentialism). We suggest that each theory can be used to provide reasons to take reciprocity seriously as an independent moral concept, despite any other differences. Third, we explore general meanings and uses of the concept of reciprocity, with the primary intention of demonstrating that it cannot be simply reduced to other more frequently invoked moral concepts such as beneficence or justice. We argue that reciprocity can function as a mid-level principle in public health, and generally, captures a core social obligation arising once an individual or group is burdened as a result of acting for the benefit of others (even if they derive a benefit themselves). We conclude that while more needs to be explored in relation to the theoretical justification and application of reciprocity, sufficient arguments can be made for it to be taken more seriously as a key principle within public health ethics and bioethics more generally. Springer Netherlands 2016-01-21 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4823342/ /pubmed/26797512 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9691-z Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Symposium: Tuberculosis
Silva, Diego S.
Dawson, Angus
Upshur, Ross E.G.
Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control
title Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control
title_full Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control
title_fullStr Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control
title_full_unstemmed Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control
title_short Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control
title_sort reciprocity and ethical tuberculosis treatment and control
topic Symposium: Tuberculosis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4823342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26797512
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9691-z
work_keys_str_mv AT silvadiegos reciprocityandethicaltuberculosistreatmentandcontrol
AT dawsonangus reciprocityandethicaltuberculosistreatmentandcontrol
AT upshurrosseg reciprocityandethicaltuberculosistreatmentandcontrol