Ethics of U.S. government policy responses to the COVID‐19 pandemic: A utilitarianism perspective

Moral characteristics predicting COVID-19 vaccination

OBJECTIVE

The current study aims to assess, for the first time, whether vaccination is predicted by different behavioral and cognitive aspects of moral decision-making.

BACKGROUND

Studies linking moral factors to vaccination have largely examined whether vaccination decisions can be explained by individual differences in the endorsement of various principles and norms central to deontology-based arguments in vaccination ethics. However, these studies have overlooked whether individuals prioritize norms over other considerations when making decisions, such as maximizing consequences (utilitarianism).

METHOD

In a sample of 1492 participants, the current study assessed whether vaccination is explained by individual differences in three aspects of moral decision-making (consequence sensitivity, norm sensitivity, and action tendency), while also considering ethics position (idealism, relativism) and moral identity.

RESULTS

Supportive vaccination (vaccine uptake accompanied by a positive attitude toward vaccines) was associated with utilitarianism (increased consequence sensitivity) and increased tolerance to risks and harm toward others. Meanwhile, although those in the non-vaccinated group was associated with higher harm sensitivities, they neither supported nor received the COVID vaccines (when vaccines prevent harm from infection).

CONCLUSION

Pro-vaccination messages may be made more effective by addressing perceptions of harms associated with vaccines and infections, respectively.

Vaccine Passports and Political Legitimacy: A Public Reason Framework for Policymakers

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve, taking its toll on people's lives around the world, vaccine passports remain a contentious topic of debate in most liberal democracies. While a small literature on vaccine passports has sprung up over the past few years that considers their ethical pros and cons, in this paper we focus on the question of when vaccine passports are politically legitimate. Specifically, we put forward a 'public reason ethics framework' for resolving ethical disputes and use the case of vaccine passports to demonstrate how it works. The framework walks users through a structured analysis of a vaccine passport proposal to determine whether the proposal can be publicly justified and is therefore legitimate. Use of this framework may also help policymakers to design more effective vaccine passports, by incorporating structured input from the public, and thereby better taking the public's interests and values into account. In short, a public reason ethics framework is meant to encourage better, more legitimate decision-making, resulting in policies that are ethically justifiable, legitimate and effective.

Wearable respiratory sensors for COVID-19 monitoring

Since its outbreak in 2019, COVID-19 becomes a pandemic, severely burdening the public healthcare systems and causing an economic burden. Thus, societies around the world are prioritizing a return to normal. However, fighting the recession could rekindle the pandemic owing to the lightning-fast transmission rate of SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, many of those who are infected remain asymptomatic for several days, leading to the increased possibility of unintended transmission of the virus. Thus, developing rigorous and universal testing technologies to continuously detect COVID-19 for entire populations remains a critical challenge that needs to be overcome. Wearable respiratory sensors can monitor biomechanical signals such as the abnormities in respiratory rate and cough frequency caused by COVID-19, as well as biochemical signals such as viral biomarkers from exhaled breaths. The point-of-care system enabled by advanced respiratory sensors is expected to promote better control of the pandemic by providing an accessible, continuous, widespread, noninvasive, and reliable solution for COVID-19 diagnosis, monitoring, and management.