Submit an outline of your paper. Submit a list of 5 references from legitimate sources (no blogs please) that will inform your public health issue.
I. Introduction to the
A. Data scope of the problem: incidence/prevalence data
B. Impact of public health problem
C. Who, what, when, how
II. Proposed intervention and ethical dilemma
A. How will the intervention be implemented
B. What are the major concerns raised by this issue
III. Ethical Analysis
A. Assessing the facts – is there evidence that this intervention will actually help the public health problem? Is there data?
B. Relevant Ethical issues or Moral Considerations (what values are in conflict?)
1. Will it produce benefits
2. Will it avoid, prevent or reduce harms (are there any unintended consequences?)
3. Will it maximize benefits over harm; what about other considerations like cost?
4. Will the benefits and burdens be distributed fairly?
5. Will individual choices be respected (or is the such that it should override individual liberty)
6. Are there concern about privacy or confidentiality?
7. promise keeping
8. disclosing accurate information; is there transparency in the process?
9. maintaining public trust
C. Who are the major stakeholders in the outcome and what positions will they take?
D. Which features of the are relevant?
IV. Justification for your conclusion (is this policy/intervention ethical?)
In the US, we have a number of values such as liberty to do as one choses related to what one believes is a “good life” and a right to keep medical information private. Public health interventions sometimes clash with these values. If you are arguing in favor of a public health intervention that clashes with these values, there are a number of “justificatory conditions” that must be met to override these values. You may want to discuss them in your paper.
Effectiveness: it the action likely to accomplish the ?
Necessity: Is the action necessary to override the conflicting ethical claims to achieve the public health goal>
Least infringement: Is the action the least restrictive and least intrusive?
Proportionality: Will the probable benefits of the action outweigh the infringed moral norms and any negative effects?
Impartiality: Are all potentially affected stakeholders treated impartially (fairly)?
Public justification: Can public health officials offer public justification that citizens, and in particular those most affected, could find acceptable in principle?