Against Moral Responsibilisation of Health: Prudential Responsibility and Health Promotion

The duty of care and the right to be cared for: is there a duty to treat the unvaccinated?

Vaccine hesitancy or refusal has been one of the major obstacles to herd immunity against Covid-19 in high-income countries and one of the causes for the emergence of variants. The refusal of people who are eligible for vaccination to receive vaccination creates an ethical dilemma between the duty of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to care for patients and their right to be taken care of. This paper argues for an extended social contract between patients and society wherein vaccination against Covid-19 is conceived as essential for the protection of the right of healthcare providers to be taken care of. Thus, a duty of care is only valid when those who can receive vaccination actually receive it. Whenever that is not the case, the continuing functioning of HCPs can only be perceived as supererogatory and not obligatory.

The iceberg of dementia risk: empirical and conceptual arguments in favor of structural interventions for brain health

While pharmacological interventions for dementia struggle to demonstrate improved outcomes for patients and at-risk populations, non-pharmacological lifestyle interventions have been proposed as a tool to achieve dementia risk reduction. In this review, it is argued that lifestyle modification alone is a surface-level intervention from the point of view of fair and far-reaching dementia prevention. Below the tip of this "iceberg of dementia risk," there are living conditions and social structures that represent deeper contributions to risk in the population. It is argued that alongside lifestyle modification, activist research and structural interventions are needed to make our society fairer and more dementia-resilient.

"We Are All in This Together": Which Memorable Moral Messages Guided Student Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic?

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed lessons about the moral bases of student compliance with pandemic health messaging, which is a vital concern for educational institutions where students learn and live in close proximity. Existing theoretical and empirical work suggests that audiences may be receptive when prescribed behavior aligns with memorable moral messages (MMM) received from family members or other valued sources. We report the results of two studies that examined the nature of MMM that students found relevant in the fall of 2020 and the moral values they appeared to invoke. In the first, focus group interviews and qualitative thematic analysis were used to identify underlying moral themes. Findings indicated that students were influencegd by MMM focused on empathy/caring, those that addressed communal versus individual responsibilities, and messages that prioritized virtues that were needed (e.g., patience) during the pandemic. During this first phase of the research, we also collected a verbatim list of MMM that students reported recalling and using. To determine if quantitative evidence supported the three-part categorization scheme, a second study asked a sample of 327 students to rate the influence of the MMM reported in Study One. Exploratory factor analysis largely confirmed Study One, with consideration for others, self-determination, and communal responsibility emerging as primary moral considerations. Findings of the two studies are interpreted as partial support for moral foundations theory and consistent with the expectations of negotiated morality theory. Recommendations for health educators and experts are offered, including framing compliance guidelines in a manner consistent with MMM received from family members and helping students navigate the moral tension between self and communal interests.

The Myth of Zero-Sum Responsibility: Towards Scaffolded Responsibility for Health

Some people argue that the distribution of medical resources should be sensitive to agents' responsibility for their ill-health. In contrast, others point to the social determinants of health to argue that the collective agents that control the conditions in which agents act should bear responsibility. To a large degree, this is a debate in which those who hold individuals responsible currently have the upper hand: warranted appeals to individual responsibility effectively block allocation of any significant degree of responsibility to collective agents. We suggest that a different understanding of individual responsibility might lead to a fairer allocation of blame. Scaffolded agency is individual agency exercised in a context in which opportunities and affordances are structured by others. Appeals to scaffolded agency at once recognize the role of the individual and of the collective agents who have put the scaffolds in place.

Politicians' views on societal responsibility and possibility to promote newly arrived migrants' health in Sweden

Newly arrived migrants in Sweden risk facing ill health. Politicians at the local and regional levels are involved in many decisions regarding the social determinants of health. The aim of this study was to explore politicians' views on different societal actors' responsibility and possibility to promote newly arrived migrants' health. Data were collected through online questionnaires completed by 667 politicians from municipality and regional councils in northern Sweden. Bivariate analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Multivariate analyses were performed using cluster analysis and binary logistic regression analysis. The results show that politicians generally rate societal actors' responsibility and possibility to promote the general population's health higher than newly arrived migrants' health. Moreover, they consider societal actors' responsibility to be greater than their possibility to promote health. Factors significantly contributing to politicians' high ratings of societal responsibility and possibility are attitude (odds ratio [OR] = 2.156, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.306-3.558), specific knowledge of newly arrived migrants' health status (OR = 1.528, 95% CI: 1.005-2.323), personal interest in public health (OR = 2.452, 95% CI: 1.460-4.119), being a municipality politician (OR = 1.659, 95% CI: 1.031-2.670) and being female (OR = 1.934, 95% CI: 1.333-2.806). This study shows that politicians generally rate societal responsibility and possibility to promote newly arrived migrants' health rather high. Personal characteristics are important for politicians' high or low ratings of responsibility and possibility, suggesting insufficient structural support for politicians in health promotion.

Exercising Caution: A Case for Ethics Analysis in Physical Activity Promotion

Despite the important role of physical activity in population health and well-being, it has received less focus in public health ethics as compared to other modifiable lifestyle factors such as smoking and diet. However, when considering the current and potential role of physical activity within public health—including interventions and policies to encourage physical activity in schools and workplaces, changes to the built environment and the equity issues associated with access to physical activity—it is a ripe territory for ethical analysis. This paper makes a case for a more sustained focus on physical activity within public health ethics by reviewing two ethical issues within physical activity and public health: physical activity inequity as a structural injustice issue, and stigma in physical activity promotion. While the benefits of physical activity for every age group and demographic are numerous, ethics oversight is encouraged to ensure that these efforts do not impose unnecessary risks or stigmatize marginalized populations.

The 5 K run in popular fiction: Reading about parkrun and couch to 5 K

Recent years have witnessed great interest in mass-participation running events (1), and organisations such as parkrun and fitness programmes like Couch to 5 K, have been instrumental in enabling participation for inexperienced runners. Concomitant with this has been a number of fictional works which centre on the 5 K run. I contend that exploring fictional texts can offer a fresh take on how movements such as parkrun and Couch to 5 K have entered the popular imagination. The four texts explored are Wake's Saturday Morning Park Run (2020), Park's A Run in the Park (2019), Boleyn's Coming Home to Cariad Cove (2022), and James's I Follow You (2020). The analysis is arranged thematically around the categories of health promotion, individual transformation, and community building. I argue that these texts frequently operate as health promotion tools and can help familiarise would-be runners with how parkrun and Couch to 5 K work.

Responsibility and the recursion problem

A considerable literature has emerged around the idea of using 'personal responsibility' as an allocation criterion in healthcare distribution, where a person's being suitably responsible for their health needs may justify additional conditions on receiving healthcare, and perhaps even limiting access entirely, sometimes known as 'responsibilisation'. This discussion focuses most prominently, but not exclusively, on 'luck egalitarianism', the view that deviations from equality are justified only by suitably free choices. A superficially separate issue in distributive justice concerns the two-way relationship between health and other social goods: deficits in health typically undermine one's abilities to secure advantage in other areas, which in turn often have further negative effects on health. This paper outlines the degree to which this latter relationship between health and other social goods exacerbates an existing problem for proponents of responsibilisation (the 'harshness objection') in ways that standard responses to this objection cannot address. Placing significant conditions on healthcare access because of a person's prior responsibility risks trapping them in, or worsening, negative cycles where poor health and associated lack of opportunity reinforce one another, making further poor yet ultimately responsible choices more likely. It ends by considering three possible solutions to this problem.

Relationship between cardiovascular health status and attitudes towards responsibility for health

Abstract

Introduction: Current concerns of medical scientific research show an increasing interest in the field of individual and community level health promotion based on health responsibility approaches. Achieving and maintaining cardiovascular health of individuals has a significant impact on reducing the burden of cardiovascular disease at population level.

Aim: The objective of the study was to assess the cardiovascular health from a forward-looking perspective on health responsibility in order to improve attitudes approaches.

Materials and methods: The study is a cross-sectional community survey with multistage sampling. A validated questionnaire was used and filled up by the participating physicians. Cardiovascular health was measured using the cardiovascular health metrics categories according the definition of the American Heart Association.

Results: A total of 2,612 respondents (mean age 56.83±13.8 years, range 18 to 92 years, 34.8% male) were included into the study. The scores of cardiovascular health and its subscales of participants free of cardiovascular disease were found to be significantly higher (p<0.001), with the exception of health behaviours subscale scores (p=0.922). However, health behaviour subscale scores for personal attitudes approaches towards responsibility for health were found to be significantly higher in comparison to social (p<0.001) and undecided approaches (p<0.001).

Conclusions: Our data suggest that a population free of cardiovascular disease is not likely to engage in health behaviours to prevent the onset of the disease, appearing willing to improve their behaviours after acquiring the disease. Further studies are needed to account for the efficacy interventions focusing on individual’s motivation to assume personal responsibility for behaviours affecting their health.

Avoiding Over-Reliance on Multi-Domain Interventions for Dementia Prevention

Given the unknown therapeutic value of targeting Alzheimer's disease pathology and the discovery of robust risk factors for dementia, non-pharmacological risk reduction (RR) is increasingly offered as an alternative to targeting Alzheimer's disease pathology. While RR will surely be a useful tool to make public health gains, we propose solutions to three possible issues with over-reliance on multi-domain interventions to achieve RR: limited individual impact, an exclusive focus on later life, and overlooking social determinants of dementia. We argue in favor of a broader debate within the research community and greater society about how different therapeutic avenues should be explored.

Concepts of responsibility in the German media debate on sugar taxation: a qualitative framing analysis

Background

Framing plays an important role in health-policy processes. Responsibility for health is a salient and contested concept in the framing around food policies, such as sugar taxes. To deepen the understanding of the sugar tax process in Germany and contribute to a better understanding of how responsibility frames are used in debates on health policies, this study investigated responsibility concepts underlying the German media debate on sugar taxation.

Methods

We analyzed 114 national German newspaper articles, published between January 2018 and March 2019, following an inductive thematic analysis approach with an additional deductive focus on responsibility. We identified important contested concepts around sugar taxation, analyzed their combination into narrative frames, and scrutinized those narrative frames for underlying responsibility concepts.

Results

First, we identified important contested concepts regarding problems, actors and solutions (i.e. sugar tax and its potential alternatives). Those laid the basis for 13 narrative frames, of which the ‘unscrupulous industry’, ‘government failure’, ‘vulnerable youth’ and the ‘oversimplification’, ‘responsible industry’ and ‘nanny state’ frames were most salient. Within the narrative frames, we found a dominance of societal responsibility framing with a conflict between binding, legislative measures and voluntary solutions in cooperation with the food and beverages industry.

Conclusions

Questions around societal responsibility for health and corporate social responsibility framing become more salient in sugar tax debates. Future research should, therefore, investigate how public health advocates can successfully engage with corporate social responsibility narratives, and how legislative measures can be framed in ways that engender trust in governmental actions.

Personal responsibility for health? A phenomenographic analysis of general practitioners' conceptions

OBJECTIVE

To analyse and describe general practitioners' perceptions of the notion of a 'personal responsibility for health'.

DESIGN

Interview study, phenomenographic analysis.

SETTING

Swedish primary health care.

SUBJECTS

General Practitioners (GPs).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Using the phenomenographic method, the different views of the phenomenon (here: personal responsibility for health) were presented in an outcome space to illustrate the range of perceptions.

RESULTS

The participants found the notion of personal responsibility for health relevant to their practice. There was a wide range of perceptions regarding the origins of this responsibility, which was seen as coming from within yourself; from your relationships to specific others; and/or from your relationship with the generalized other. Furthermore, the expressions of this responsibility were perceived as including owning your health problem; not offloading all responsibility onto the GP; taking active measures to keep and improve health; and/or accepting help in health. The GP was described as playing a key role in shaping and defining the patient's responsibility for his/her health. Some aspects of personal responsibility for health roused strong emotions in the participants, especially situations where the patient was seen as offloading all responsibility onto the GP.

CONCLUSION

The notion of personal responsibility for health is relevant to GPs. However, it is open to a broad range of interpretations and modulated by the patient-physician interaction. This may make it unsuitable for usage in health care priority settings. More research is mandated to further investigate how physicians work with patient responsibility, and how this affects the patient-physician relationship and the physician's own well-being.Key PointsThe notion of personal responsibility for health has relevance for discussions about priority setting and person-centred care.This study, using a phenomenographic approach, investigated the views of Swedish GPs about the notion of personal responsibility for health.The participants found the notion relevant to their practice. They expressed a broad range of views of what a personal responsibility for health entails and how it arises. The GP was described as playing a key role in shaping and defining the patient's responsibilities for his/her health.The notion was emotionally charged to the participants, and when patients were seen as offloading all responsibility onto the GP this gave rise to frustration.

Healthcare, Responsibility and Golden Opportunities

When it comes to determining how healthcare resources should be allocated, there are many factors that could-and perhaps should-be taken into account. One such factor is a patient's responsibility for his or her illness, or for the behavior that caused it. Policies that take responsibility for the unhealthy lifestyle or its outcomes into account-responsibility-sensitive policies-have faced a series of criticisms. One holds that agents often fail to meet either the control or epistemic conditions on responsibility with regard to their unhealthy lifestyles or their outcomes. Another holds that even if patients sometimes are responsible for these items, we cannot know whether a particular patient is responsible for them. In this article, we propose a type of responsibility-sensitive policy that may be able to surmount these difficulties. Under this type of policy, patients are empowered to change to a healthier lifestyle by being given what we call a 'Golden Opportunity' to change. Such a policy would not only avoid concerns about patients' fulfilment of conditions on responsibility for their lifestyles, it would also allow healthcare authorities to be justified in believing that a patient who does not change her lifestyle is responsible for the unhealthy lifestyle. We conclude with a discussion of avenues for further work, and place this policy in the broader context of the debate on responsibility for health.

Nipping Diseases in the Bud? Ethical and Social Considerations of the Concept of 'Disease Interception'

‘Disease interception’ describes the treatment of a disease in its clinically inapparent phase and is increasingly used in medical literature. However, no precise definition, much less an ethical evaluation, has been developed yet. This article starts with a definition of ‘disease interception’ by distinguishing it from other preventions. It then analyses the ethical and social implications of the concept in light of the four principles of medical ethics by Beauchamp and Childress. The term ‘disease interception’ refers to a form of secondary prevention applied in a short interception window intended to prevent a preclinical disease from developing further. We propose the definition ‘early and targeted secondary prevention by treatment’. The ethical evaluation of the concept shows that while it promises to be beneficial, it raises a number of ethical and social challenges regarding patient autonomy and justice. In order to ensure decision-making that respects patient autonomy, commercially motivated metaphors such as ‘disease interception’ should make way for precise definitions. Future research should not only focus on how to detect clinically inapparent diseases but also on the ethical question, when this is justifiable and what consequences it has for the individual and society as a whole.

COVID-19 Capitalism: The Profit Motive versus Public Health

Market incentives in capitalist economies and public health requirements are contradictory. In the COVID-19 pandemic, market-rewarded self-interested behavior has been exposed as a source of mortality and morbidity. Profit-motivated behaviors can keep people from accessing necessities for health thereby harming individuals and possibly damaging population health. The profit motive can also undermine healthcare system capacity by maldistributing goods that are inputs to healthcare. Furthermore, because profit-seeking is economically rational in capitalism, capitalist imperatives may be incompatible with public health. The ways markets misallocate resources provide a rationale for state responsibility for health, which is a public good.

Commentary: Responsibility-Sensitive Healthcare Funding: Three Responses to Clavien and Hurst's Critique

Christine Clavien and Samia Hurst1 (henceforth C-H) make at least three valuable contributions to the literature on responsibility and healthcare. They offer an admirably clear and workable set of criteria for determining a patient's degree of responsibility for her health condition; they deploy those criteria to cast doubt on the view that patients with lifestyle-related conditions are typically significantly responsible for their conditions; and they outline several practical difficulties that would be raised by any attempt to introduce responsibility-sensitive healthcare funding. I am sympathetic to the general thrust of their argument, share-at least tentatively-their policy conclusions, and was persuaded by much of the detail of their argument. However, I do have three critical comments.

Healthy aging and the University of the Third Age - Health behavior and subjective health outcomes in older adults

INTRODUCTION

By participating in the University of the Third Age (U3A), retirees are offered the opportunity for activation and development in the later years of life. However, little is known how certain aspects of healthy aging, such as health-related behavior and subjective health outcomes, differ between U3A students and other older adults not taking part in any form of education. To address this, the aim of the present study was to compare selected aspects of healthy aging in a group of U3A members with older adults not taking part in any form of lifelong learning. The study also establishes relationships between the tested variables and predictors of health behavior.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

277 older adults (130 U3A members and 147 non-members) aged 60-92 (M = 68.84, SD = 5.32) completed measures of health behavior, self-rated physical health, self-rated sense of own health responsibility and satisfaction with life.

RESULTS

The U3A attendees presented significantly higher scores for general health behavior and some of its components, and declared higher self-rated health than their peers not affiliated to any educational organization. Self-rated health, responsibility for health and satisfaction with life were positively correlated with general health behavior and most of their categories. but the correlation coefficients differed between both groups. A hierarchical regression model demonstrated the predictive roles of attendance in U3A, sociodemographic and subjective factors in health behavior undertaking.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results may help to identify older adults who should be targeted in interventions aimed at supporting healthy aging.

The Ethics of Workplace Health Promotion

Companies increasingly offer their employees the opportunity to participate in voluntary Workplace Health Promotion programmes. Although such programmes have come into focus through national and regional regulation throughout much of the Western world, their ethical implications remain largely unexamined. This article maps the territory of the ethical issues that have arisen in relation to voluntary health promotion in the workplace against the background of asymmetric relationships between employers and employees. It addresses questions of autonomy and voluntariness, discrimination and distributive justice, as well as privacy and responsibility. Following this analysis, we highlight the inadequacy of currently established ethical frameworks to sufficiently cover all aspects of workplace health promotion. Thus, we recommend the consideration of principles from all such frameworks in combination, in a joint reflection of an Ethics of Workplace Health Promotion.

Reflections on Responsibility and the Prospect of a Long Life

In this commentary on Brown and colleagues’ paper, entitled ‘Against Moral Responsibilisation of Health: Prudential Responsibility and Health Promotion’, I highlight the tension between individual responsibility—even when this is prudential and not moral—and systemic factors that impact people's health. Brown and colleagues and I agree that individuals are frequently held inappropriately responsible for health-related behaviours or diseases that have become associated with the so-called ‘lifestyle’ diseases. We further agree that health is an instrumental value to people, allowing them to achieve their goals or plans. However, while Brown and colleagues argue that health promotion is justified in providing education campaigns that highlight the pragmatic reasons people have for improving their health-related behaviours, I argue that this amounts to the same inaction on systemic issues as holding individuals morally responsible. Further, without action on systemic issues such as the social determinants of health, some people lack the kinds of future-oriented pragmatic reasons that Brown and colleagues place at the centre of their argument. Rather, for some groups, the pragmatic thing is to enjoy current pleasures even if unhealthy, rather than to forego them for the sake of health in a mythical future.