The ethics of anonymized HIV testing of pregnant women: a reappraisal.
(33/796)
Seroprevalence monitoring of HIV in pregnant women by anonymized unlinked testing has been widely adopted in the UK and other countries. The scientific rationale is to eliminate participation and selection bias. The ethical justification is that the public good outweighs any harm to individuals. The assumption has been that individuals have had their autonomy respected by the offer of informed consent. In the light of new scientific evidence, it is doubtful that the public good is best served by the continuation of anonymously testing women receiving antenatal care. It is submitted that it is no longer ethical for health professionals to refrain from informing pregnant women of the benefits of voluntary named testing, or to request their consent to anonymized testing. The legal and moral concept of duty of care is examined, and the abrogation of this duty through anonymization is explained. (+info)
Ethical considerations in international HIV vaccine trials: summary of a consultative process conducted by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS).
(34/796)
Research that is initiated, designed or funded by sponsor agencies based in countries with relatively high social and economic development, and conducted in countries that are relatively less developed, gives rise to many important ethical challenges. Although clinical trials of HIV vaccines began ten years ago in the US and Europe, an increasing number of trials are now being conducted or planned in other countries, including several that are considered "developing" countries. Safeguarding the rights and welfare of individuals participating as research subjects in developing countries is a priority. In September, 1997, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) embarked on a process of international consultation; its purpose was further to define the important ethical issues and to formulate guidance that might facilitate the ethical design and conduct of HIV vaccine trials in international contexts. This paper summarises the major outcomes of the UNAIDS consultative process. (+info)
Environmental injustice in North Carolina's hog industry.
(35/796)
Rapid growth and the concentration of hog production in North Carolina have raised concerns of a disproportionate impact of pollution and offensive odors on poor and nonwhite communities. We analyzed the location and characteristics of 2,514 intensive hog operations in relation to racial, economic, and water source characteristics of census block groups, neighborhoods with an average of approximately 500 households each. We used Poisson regression to evaluate the extent to which relationships between environmental justice variables and the number of hog operations persisted after consideration of population density. There are 18.9 times as many hog operations in the highest quintile of poverty as compared to the lowest; however, adjustment for population density reduces the excess to 7.2. Hog operations are approximately 5 times as common in the highest three quintiles of the percentage nonwhite population as compared to the lowest, adjusted for population density. The excess of hog operations is greatest in areas with both high poverty and high percentage nonwhites. Operations run by corporate integrators are more concentrated in poor and nonwhite areas than are operations run by independent growers. Most hog operations, which use waste pits that can contaminate groundwater, are located in areas with high dependence on well water for drinking. Disproportionate impacts of intensive hog production on people of color and on the poor may impede improvements in economic and environmental conditions that are needed to address public health in areas which have high disease rates and low access to medical care as compared to other areas of the state. (+info)
Biomedical and development paradigms in AIDS prevention.
(36/796)
In the fight against the HIV/AIDS pandemic different approaches can be distinguished, reflecting professional backgrounds, world views and political interests. One important distinction is between the biomedical and the development paradigms. The biomedical paradigm is characterized by individualization and the concept of "risk". This again is related to the concept of the market where health is a product of services and progress a series of new discoveries that can be marketed. The development paradigm is characterized by participation of the different stakeholders and by community work. The concept "vulnerability" is important in the development paradigm and emphasis is placed on efforts to decrease this vulnerability in a variety of sustainable ways. Biomedical technology is definitely one of the tools in these efforts. In the beginning of the pandemic the biomedical approach was important for the discovery of the virus and understanding its epidemiology. Later, stakeholders became involved. In the light of absence of treatment or vaccines, the development paradigm became more important and the two approaches were more in balance. However, since the reports about effective treatment of AIDS and hope of development of vaccines, the biomedical paradigm has become a leading principle in many HIV/AIDS prevention programmes. There is a need for a better balance between the two paradigms. Especially in developing countries, where it is not realistic to think that sustainable biomedical interventions can be organized on a short-term basis, it would be counterproductive to base our efforts to deal with HIV/AIDS exclusively on the biomedical approach. (+info)
Death--whose decision? Euthanasia and the terminally ill.
(37/796)
In Australia and Oregon, USA, legislation to permit statutory sanctioned physician-assisted dying was enacted. However, opponents, many of whom held strong religious views, were successful with repeal in Australia. Similar opposition in Oregon was formidable, but ultimately lost in a 60-40% vote reaffirming physician-assisted dying. This paper examines the human dilemma which arises when technological advances in end-of-life medicine conflict with traditional and religious sanctity-of-life values. Society places high value on personal autonomy, particularly in the United States. We compare the potential for inherent contradictions and arbitrary decisions where patient autonomy is either permitted or forbidden. The broader implications for human experience resulting from new legislation in both Australia and Oregon are discussed. We conclude that allowing autonomy for the terminally ill, within circumscribed options, results in fewer ethical contradictions and greater preservation of dignity. (+info)
Global public-private partnerships: Part II--What are the health issues for global governance?
(38/796)
This is the second of a two-part review of global public-private partnerships (GPPPs) for health development. Part I was published in the April issue of the Bulletin (Vol. 78, No. 4). The recent emergence of GPPPs is rapidly reconfiguring the international health landscape. While most multilateral and bilateral agencies are currently grappling with how to proceed, there is little information in the public domain concerning how individual partnerships work and to date very little consideration of the many implications of this trend. This paper differentiates between product-based, product development-based and issues/systems-based GPPPs and describes a number of examples of each type in the health sector. The benefits of these initiatives, not least the major resources which they harness for specific health problems, are identified. The final section of the paper explores the implications and dilemmas posed by GPPPs. It discusses whether or not shared goals can transcend conflicting values and mandates and how governance of partnership arrangements may transform and undermine certain attributes of multilateral organizations. The paper concludes that the current climate of goodwill between public and private sectors offers an opportunity that should not be missed: it can be used not only to foster new partnership but to ensure that partnership is truly in the interests of international public health. (+info)
Can unequal be more fair? A response to Andrew Avins.
(39/796)
In this paper, we respond to Andrew Avins's recent review of methods whose use he advocates in clinical trials, to make them more ethical. He recommends in particular, "unbalanced randomisation". However, we argue that, before such a recommendation can be made, it is important to establish why unequal randomisation might offer ethical advantages over equal randomisation, other things being equal. It is important to make a pragmatic distinction between trials of treatments that are already routinely available and trials of restricted treatments. We conclude that unequal randomisation could, indeed, be an ethical compromise between protecting the interests of participants and those of society. (+info)
Benchmarks of fairness for health care reform: a policy tool for developing countries.
(40/796)
Teams of collaborators from Colombia, Mexico, Pakistan, and Thailand have adapted a policy tool originally developed for evaluating health insurance reforms in the United States into "benchmarks of fairness" for assessing health system reform in developing countries. We describe briefly the history of the benchmark approach, the tool itself, and the uses to which it may be put. Fairness is a wide term that includes exposure to risk factors, access to all forms of care, and to financing. It also includes efficiency of management and resource allocation, accountability, and patient and provider autonomy. The benchmarks standardize the criteria for fairness. Reforms are then evaluated by scoring according to the degree to which they improve the situation, i.e. on a scale of -5 to 5, with zero representing the status quo. The object is to promote discussion about fairness across the disciplinary divisions that keep policy analysts and the public from understanding how trade-offs between different effects of reforms can affect the overall fairness of the reform. The benchmarks can be used at both national and provincial or district levels, and we describe plans for such uses in the collaborating sites. A striking feature of the adaptation process is that there was wide agreement on this ethical framework among the collaborating sites despite their large historical, political and cultural differences. (+info)