The Impacts of Influenza on the Population - Term Paper Example

I. Influenza Pandemic and the Need for Action A. Background Information Influenza has become a common pandemic in the last half-century occurring over three times in fifty years. With such prevalence, it is evident that an additional attack of the virus may strike people in the near future1. This defined the agenda of the World Health Organization convention that discussed possible measures of planning and preparedness in case the pandemic reappears. The need for preparedness cannot receive underestimation because of the impacts of influenza on the population. Influenza causes fatal consequences because of the high transmission rates of the virus causing the disease. Moreover, infection with the virus needs proper and immediate treatment, otherwise the victim succumbs to death. Moreover, the need for prevention of infection during times of the breakout compels health workers, researchers, and governments make critical decisions2. Being a pandemic, the previous occurrences were defined by scarce medical resources of prevention and treatment. This is the more reason why preparedness is mandatory. It is unfortunate that the previous occurrences of the influenza pandemic do not reflect any patterns that can prove useful in predicting what future occurrences may bring3. Therefore, it is likely that the globe will be in turmoil because of the limited resources. Therefore, there is an ardent need for proper planning for the allocation of the limited resources in case an influenza pandemic result in the future4. Ethical principles serve as guidelines in the formulation of policies and strategies for combating the highly debilitating pandemic5. The application of ethical principles in the formulation of policies in the management of the influenza pandemic has caused confusion. Different ethical principles define a range of policies that the World Health Organization identified as critical in combating the influenza pandemic6. B. Challenges in Policy Determination Regarding the Influenza Pandemic Policy formulation in a bid to maintain the required level of preparedness regarding an influenza pandemic should address the different types of intervention. Evidently, prevention is one of the intervention methods. Policies addressing the prevention strategies and their application are essential. Moreover, the infected individuals will need to receive medication. The challenge of defining policies concerning the intervention strategies is determining how the distribution of the available resources will take place. Identifying the appropriate target groups for the prevention and treatment strategies, and defining the priority list is challenging. This implies that the consideration of different ethical issues is critical in order to receive guidelines. Evidently, the prevention and treatment resources are limited, a factor that explains the need for the application of ethical principles in the allocation of the limited resources. The second challenge is the fact that different countries have varying economic standing. Three categories are evident, and they include, the developed upper class societies, the middle class, and the lower class7. The influenza pandemic does not discriminate between these communities, because of its fast transmission. This places a challenge for the World Health Organization to allocate the resources to nations and societies with a diverse economic standing. The rich countries have the potential to purchase medical resources required for combating the influenza pandemic. Moreover, the rich countries lack the capacity to afford such resources. The application of ethical principles in the determination of how each country can have a share of the limited resources is critical8. II. Ethical Principles that Serve as Guidelines of Formulating Policies of Combating Influenza Pandemic A. Utilitarianism-Consequentialism The World Health Organization identified utilitarianism as one of the ethical principles that can serve as a guideline in the definition of policies that have the potential of addressing an influenza pandemic. Utilitarianism focuses on the potential consequences of any policy decided upon as one of the critical strategies of addressing future influenza pandemics. According to this principle, the selected policy should have the potential of yielding more benefit to a greater number of people9. Under utilitarianism, the World Health Organization can focus on the policy of ‘saving the maximum number of lives possible’. This would mean that the available resources would be used in helping the largest possible number of people. Therefore, the globe would exhibit concerted efforts in ensuring that victims of the pandemic receive treatment while the vulnerable population receives prevention vaccines10. This measure would receive a measure of justification when considering utilitarianism and the health benefits. However, it is evident that utilitarianism also considers other benefits such as economic, social, and familial. When considered in this perspective, then some policies that may present more combined benefits may surpass the need to save the largest number of people11. However, ensuring that most lives are saved may imply that the need for special attention to people with the influenza virus is unjustified. This is because saving the number lives possible applies to all the sick people. This does not give any additional privilege to the influenza victims12. In other cases, utilitarianism may also serve as a guideline in determining the target group of medication and prevention. When in a dilemma of the target group to save, whether the young or the elderly, utilitarianism highlights that the young deserve the claim of treatment and prevention. This would be the case because consideration of consequences would focus on the action that ensures that every individual has increased opportunities in life. Evidently, the elderly have had their fair share of experiences and opportunities, and saving the young generation with the available resources would ensure progression of the society in the future. The younger generation is the hub for the potential that the future depends on. Therefore, a society having a future is maximum benefit to all13. In addition, utilitarianism justifies the use of resources in addressing the risk that health workers pose in addressing the influenza. In an effort of ensuring that the largest When presented with the choice of saving highest possible number, then the health workers need good health14. This, therefore, justifies using resources to address the health needs of health workers both in prevention and treatment. Healthy health workers have the potential to address the needs of the community especially concerning the pandemic. This will serve to maximize their service, hence saving many lives. Moreover, utilitarianism place justifies the use of the available resources in ensuring that vaccines against the vaccine are introduced. Prevention has a high level of potential by ensuring that many people are safe from infection and presents maximum benefits when compared to treatment. This indicates that the World Health Organization should adopt preventive strategies even before the outbreak of the pandemic. When making decisions concerning the isolation of people infected with the virus, quarantine measures and international border control, then utilitarianism is of critical importance as one of the guidelines. The purpose of isolation and quarantine measures is limiting the rates of transmission of the virus. Evidently, these measures are beneficial to the larger population as it ensures that the risk of contracting the virus is lower, and the infected people can receive specialized medication. Although the infected people may view it as a form of stigmatization, the purpose of isolation and quarantine measures has always been evident15. Utilitarianism justifies such measures, as they ensure the prevention of infection in the larger part of the society16. B. Egalitarian Justice-Equity Equity is an additional ethical principle that serves as an invaluable determinant of strategies for use in efforts to combat any future occurrence of an influenza pandemic17. Equity seeks to ensure that cases of discrimination, favoritism, and unfairness do not result18. Equity promotes the egalitarian view of justice, that ensures that the distribution of resources and priority determination observes justice19. Promoting equity will ensure that the rich countries will not keep all the medical resources for themselves, leaving the poor with nothing20. In many cases, the rich countries have often scrambled for the available resources, and exerting control on the availability, in a way that leaves the poor countries lacking basic health resources. This having been the observed pattern, its repetition in the case of an influenza pandemic would leave the poor countries badly affected21. Therefore, equity is critical in ensuring that all countries have the resources on combating the influenza virus. Moreover, equity seeks to ensure that the people in power do not take advantage of the preventive and treatment resources, leaving the subordinates with nothing. In terms of race, equity serves to ensure that none of the races faces discrimination during the distribution of resources. Evidently, some races such as blacks lack facilities such as hospitals, and are vulnerable because they lack disease prevention strategies. In order to ensure that fairness is observed, it would that the marginalized races receive a measure of the available resources. Since they have limited knowledge of the virus, its symptoms, and transmission modes, then the WHO needs to determine the strategies of creating awareness in all the regions. In addition to awareness, these people also deserve the privilege of receiving prevention so that the virus does not take a fatal toll on them22. Moreover, equity places emphasis on the need to allocate resources to the people who present the highest risk. For example, people living in urban areas have a high vulnerability to the virus because of the congestion existing in such areas. Therefore, it proves just to offer them more prevention and treatment resources23. It is also justifiable if awareness in such regions is created rigorously in a bid to ensure that the people observe the defined preventive measures. However, according priority to the urban places may lack any form of justification under utilitarianism, as it would be promoting the health benefits in only a selected portion of the population. However, under equity, this would be highly justified24. This principle also justifies accordance of treating priority to the people who are in the most critical condition, and requiring urgent medical intervention. The worst-off groups deserve the first priority as well25. This implies that all there is a need for identification of all the susceptible groups and granting them the top priority in both prevention and treatment. In other cases, it is fair for the limited resources to be spared for the young. Since the older generation has lived for a remarkably long time, the young deserve both preventive and treatment priorities in a bid to grant them an opportunity to live longer. Therefore, policies would target the young so that measures taken against the influenza virus may enable them to survive its fatality. The equity principle has its innings that dictate the moral value of children and young adults to be granted the first priority. In essence, this is not discrimination of any sort, but rather a fair way of ensuring that the young receive an opportunity to experience life26. C. Reciprocity Reciprocity is the third ethical principle of critical consideration when addressing the influence pandemic that may occur any unexpectedly in the future. According to this principle, it is justifiable to accord priority to health workers27. Health workers deserve such a privilege because they dedicate their lives, facing certain risks in a bid to save others. Therefore, offering them a priority in medication and prevention would cover up for the risks they face in their career28. Health workers accept the risks involved in their career voluntarily, and deserve a reciprocation of such spirit. Moreover, other workers such as cleaners of areas where the virus is handled deserve a similar privilege because of the increased risk. According them a priority also minimizes their risk of spreading the virus to patients. However, the mode of transmission of the influenza virus may present an increased risk to the entire population, eliminating the need for granting health workers a priority. Evidently, these ethical principles serve as invaluable guidelines when allocating resources to people in case of a future occurrence of influenza pandemic. The World Health Organization relies on these principles as guidelines as recorded in the documents that address the defined strategies29. After analysis of the ethical principles described above, it becomes evident that utilitarianism and egalitarianism are the ones commonly used in making critical decisions. With the level of diversity in the globe and the fatality of the influenza virus, these cannot receive any underestimation30. Bibliography World Health Organization, 2007, Addressing ethical issues in pandemic influenza planning, http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/cds_flu_ethics_5web.pdf World Health Organization, 2008, Ethical considerations in developing a public health response to pandemic influenza, http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO_CDS_EPR_GIP_2007_2c.pdf Read More