Affiliations 

  • 1 Centre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine
  • 2 Emergency Department, Assuta Samson Hospital
  • 3 Faculty of Law, University of Malaya
Public Health Ethics, 2020 Jul;13(2):133-142.
PMID: 33294029 DOI: 10.1093/phe/phaa024

Abstract

This article argues that outbreak preparedness and response should implement a 'family presence' policy for infected patients in isolation that includes the option of physical visits and care within the isolation facility under some conditions. While such a 'physical family presence' (PFP) policy could increase infections during an outbreak and may raise moral dilemmas, we argue that it is ethically justified based on the least infringement principle and the need to minimize the harms and burdens of isolation as a restrictive measure. Categorical prohibition of PFP during the course of an outbreak or epidemic is likely to result in unnecessary harms to patients and families, and violate values such as the moral commitments of families to care for each other. Supporting the option of PFP under particular circumstances, on the other hand, will least infringe these moral considerations. An additional reason for a family presence policy is that it may facilitate voluntary cooperation with isolation and other restrictive measures. We provide an analysis of these considerations for supporting modes of family presence during an outbreak emergency, before defending the riskier option of PFP in the isolation facility from plausible objections and concerns.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.