King's College London

Research portal

It Didn’t Have to be This Way: Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

It Didn’t Have to be This Way : Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak. / Camporesi, Silvia.

In: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 2020.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Camporesi, S 2020, 'It Didn’t Have to be This Way: Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak', Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10056-1

APA

Camporesi, S. (Accepted/In press). It Didn’t Have to be This Way: Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10056-1

Vancouver

Camporesi S. It Didn’t Have to be This Way: Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10056-1

Author

Camporesi, Silvia. / It Didn’t Have to be This Way : Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak. In: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. 2020.

Bibtex Download

@article{b5e35881f8c94592ae4658afdd0e410b,
title = "It Didn{\textquoteright}t Have to be This Way: Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak",
abstract = "In this paper I discuss the ethical justifiability of the limitation of freedom of movement, in particular of the ban on running outdoors, enforced in Italy as a response to the COVID-19 outbreak in the spring of 2020. I argue that through the lens of public health ethics literature, the ban on running falls short of the criterion of proportionality that public health ethics scholars and international guidelines for the ethical management of infectious disease outbreak recommend for any measure that restricts essential individual freedoms, such as the freedom of movement. The public health ethics framework, however, falls short of explaining the widespread public support that the running ban has had in Italy. I discuss possible factors which could explain the public support for the ban in Italy. Finally, I raise the question of what societal implications the abandonment of the public health ethics framework based on proportionality might have. I conclude that if it is the case, as the history of pandemics teaches us, we will experience further waves of COVID-19 outbreaks, it becomes very important to raise these questions now, with an eye towards informing public health policies for the management of future COVID-19 outbreaks. This discussion should not become politicized along the lines of liberal pro-lockdown/conservative anti-lockdown. Instead, we should reflect on the trade-offs of lockdown policies according to a pluralist framework, in which COVID-19 related deaths are not the only possible value to pursue.",
keywords = "Coronavirus, COVID-19, Italy, Pandemic, Public health ethics, Running ban",
author = "Silvia Camporesi",
year = "2020",
doi = "10.1007/s11673-020-10056-1",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Bioethical Inquiry",
issn = "1176-7529",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - It Didn’t Have to be This Way

T2 - Reflections on the Ethical Justification of the Running Ban in Northern Italy in Response to the 2020 COVID-19 Outbreak

AU - Camporesi, Silvia

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - In this paper I discuss the ethical justifiability of the limitation of freedom of movement, in particular of the ban on running outdoors, enforced in Italy as a response to the COVID-19 outbreak in the spring of 2020. I argue that through the lens of public health ethics literature, the ban on running falls short of the criterion of proportionality that public health ethics scholars and international guidelines for the ethical management of infectious disease outbreak recommend for any measure that restricts essential individual freedoms, such as the freedom of movement. The public health ethics framework, however, falls short of explaining the widespread public support that the running ban has had in Italy. I discuss possible factors which could explain the public support for the ban in Italy. Finally, I raise the question of what societal implications the abandonment of the public health ethics framework based on proportionality might have. I conclude that if it is the case, as the history of pandemics teaches us, we will experience further waves of COVID-19 outbreaks, it becomes very important to raise these questions now, with an eye towards informing public health policies for the management of future COVID-19 outbreaks. This discussion should not become politicized along the lines of liberal pro-lockdown/conservative anti-lockdown. Instead, we should reflect on the trade-offs of lockdown policies according to a pluralist framework, in which COVID-19 related deaths are not the only possible value to pursue.

AB - In this paper I discuss the ethical justifiability of the limitation of freedom of movement, in particular of the ban on running outdoors, enforced in Italy as a response to the COVID-19 outbreak in the spring of 2020. I argue that through the lens of public health ethics literature, the ban on running falls short of the criterion of proportionality that public health ethics scholars and international guidelines for the ethical management of infectious disease outbreak recommend for any measure that restricts essential individual freedoms, such as the freedom of movement. The public health ethics framework, however, falls short of explaining the widespread public support that the running ban has had in Italy. I discuss possible factors which could explain the public support for the ban in Italy. Finally, I raise the question of what societal implications the abandonment of the public health ethics framework based on proportionality might have. I conclude that if it is the case, as the history of pandemics teaches us, we will experience further waves of COVID-19 outbreaks, it becomes very important to raise these questions now, with an eye towards informing public health policies for the management of future COVID-19 outbreaks. This discussion should not become politicized along the lines of liberal pro-lockdown/conservative anti-lockdown. Instead, we should reflect on the trade-offs of lockdown policies according to a pluralist framework, in which COVID-19 related deaths are not the only possible value to pursue.

KW - Coronavirus

KW - COVID-19

KW - Italy

KW - Pandemic

KW - Public health ethics

KW - Running ban

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85095738878&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11673-020-10056-1

DO - 10.1007/s11673-020-10056-1

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85095738878

JO - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

JF - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

SN - 1176-7529

ER -

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454