Canadian perspective on ageism and selective lockdown: a response to Savulescu and Cameron.
| Autor: | Nix HP; Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford University, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK hnix@uwo.ca.; Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | Journal of medical ethics [J Med Ethics] 2022 Apr; Vol. 48 (4), pp. 268-269. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Mar 11. |
| DOI: | 10.1136/medethics-2021-107315 |
| Abstrakt: | In a recent article, 'Why lockdown of the elderly is not ageist and why levelling down equality is wrong', Savulescu and Cameron argue that a selective lockdown of older people is not ageist because it would treat people unequally based on morally relevant differences. This response argues that a selective lockdown of older people living in long-term care homes would be unjust because it would allow the expansive liberties of the general public to undermine the basic liberties of older people, and because it would discriminate on the basis of extrinsic disadvantages. Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared. (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|