Search This Blog

Sunday, August 25, 2024

Mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic

The pandemic resulted in spikes in anxiety and depression in the general public.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the mental health of people across the globe. The pandemic has caused widespread anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms.According to the UN health agency WHO, in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, prevalence of common mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety, went up by more than 25 percent. The pandemic has damaged social relationships, trust in institutions and in other people, has caused changes in work and income, and has imposed a substantial burden of anxiety and worry on the population. Women and young people face the greatest risk of depression and anxiety. According to The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study of Mental Health, Substance Use, and Suicidal Ideation During the COVID-19 Pandemic, "63 percent of young people reported experiencing substantial symptoms of anxiety and depression".

COVID-19 triggered issues caused by substance use disorders (SUDs). The pandemic disproportionately affects people with SUDs. The health consequences of SUDs (for example, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, type 2 diabetes, immunosuppression and central nervous system depression, and psychiatric disorders), and the associated environmental challenges (such as housing instability, unemployment, and criminal justice involvement), are associated with an increased risk for contracting COVID-19. Confinement rules, as well as unemployment and fiscal austerity measures during and following the pandemic period, can also affect the illicit drug market and patterns of use among consumers of illicit drugs drastically.

Mitigation measures (i.e. physical distancing, quarantine, and isolation) can worsen loneliness, mental health symptoms, withdrawal symptoms, and psychological trauma.

Predictors and potential causes of mental health symptoms

An exhausted anesthesiologist physician in Pesaro, Italy, March 2020
Sign in a gym in Ireland discouraging casual social contact due to the risk of infection. Loss of these kind of interactions has had an impact on many people during the pandemic.

The known causes of mental health issues during the pandemic included fear of infection, stigma associated with infection, isolation (imposed by individuals sheltering on their own or in compliance with lockdowns), and masks. Billions of people shifted to remote work, temporary unemployment, homeschooling or distance education, and lack of physical contact with family members, friends and colleagues.

Unknowns

As the pandemic began, the risks were uncertain. As sick people flooded into hospitals and official advice evolved, the lack of information increased stress and anxiety. Many uncertainties surrounded the beginning of the pandemic, including estimating infection risk, symptom overlap between COVID-19 and other health problems. COVID-19 also caused many mental health problems. Patients experienced unfavorable psychological effects such as post-traumatic stress symptoms, disorientation, and rage when exposed to COVID-19.

Lack of preparation

During the first wave of the epidemic, critical supplies were quickly exhausted. The most prominent items were personal protective equipment (PPE) for hospital workers and ventilators for treatment. At the onset of the pandemic in early 2020, a national survey found that many medical facilities were running out of PPE supplies, including one third of the surveyed medical facilities reporting being out of face masks and a quarter reporting a shortage or almost shortage of gowns. Another study reported that 63.3% of nurses agreed with the statement, “I am worried about inadequate personal protective equipment for healthcare personnel (PPE)”.

Stigma

As the pandemic began, anyone who interacted with infected people had to address the possibility that they might have been infected themselves and might therefore present an unknown risk to their family and others. In some cases, they were initially stigmatized.

Isolation

Many care homes subjected their residents to enforced isolation. They were locked into their rooms around the clock, including at mealtimes when their meals were delivered to their doors. Visitors were not allowed, nor was any socialization among the residents.

Powerlessness

Nurses worked longer hours during the pandemic, which increased anxiety in many. Many patients rapidly progressed once in the hospital to the ICU and ultimately, death. The absence of approved therapeutics meant that palliative care (supplemental oxygen, ventilators and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) were the only options. In some cases, this stimulated frustration and a sense of powerlessness.

Disruption

Those caring for COVID-19 patients were subject strict biosecurity measures, consigned to wearing gowns, uncomfortable masks and face shields at work. After returning home, many changed clothes before entering and isolated themselves, in an attempt to protect their families. Their jobs demanded constant awareness and vigilance, reduced their autonomy, reduced access to social support, reduced self-care, uncertainty about the effects of long-term exposure to COVID-19 patients, and fear of infecting others.

In some jurisdictions, schools were closed during the early months of the pandemic. Such closures increased anxiety, loneliness, stress, sadness, frustration, indiscipline, and hyperactivity among children.

Prevention and management

Coping with bipolar disorder and other mental health issues during COVID-19 infographic

The Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee of the United Nations recommends that mental health support during an emergency "do no harm, promote human rights and equality, use participatory approaches, build on existing resources and capacities, adopt multi-layered interventions and work with integrated support systems."

One author suggested implementing habits that act as "psychological PPE". These habits include healthy eating, healthy coping mechanisms, and practicing mindfulness and relaxation methods.

Another method that many companies followed for their employees was to provide the employees with specific mental health improvement programs in order to increase the morale of the employees and improve their mental health.

World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control guidelines

WHO and CDC issued guidelines for minimizing mental health issues during the pandemic. The summarized guidelines are:

For general population

  • Be empathetic to affected individuals.
  • Use people-first language while describing infected individuals. (for example, instead of saying "a schizophrenic person, say "a person with schizophrenia").
  • Minimize watching the news to reduce anxiety. Seek information only from trusted sources, preferably once or twice a day.
  • Protect yourself and be supportive to others.
  • Amplify positive stories of local infected people.
  • Honor healthcare workers who are caring for those with COVID-19.
  • Implement positive thinking.
  • Engage in hobbies.
  • Avoid negative coping strategies, such as avoidance of crowds and pandemic news coverage.

For healthcare workers

What are health care workers experiencing?

  • Feeling pressure is normal in a crisis. Mental health is as important as physical health.
  • Nurses face higher rates of fatigue, sleep problems, depressive disorders, PTSD, and anxiety.
  • Personal Protective Equipment shortages leaving nurses feeling unsafe.
  • Frontline health care works experience higher levels of stress
  • Nurses expressed elevated stress. Hands-on patient care increased risk perception. Vaccinated nurses were less fatigued than others. Nurses working with infected patients faced more anxiety, depression, and distress. Non-frontline nurses exhibited less depression.

What actions can healthcare workers take?

  • Adopt coping strategies, get sufficient rest, eat healthy food, be physically active, avoid tobacco, alcohol, or drugs.
  • Stay connected with loved ones, including digitally.
  • Use understandable ways to share messages with people with disabilities.
  • Know how to link people with available resources.
  • Online counseling can reduce the risk of insomnia, anxiety, and depression/burnout.

For team leaders in health facilities

  • Focus on long-term occupational capacity rather than short term results.
  • Ensure good quality communication and accurate updates.
  • Ensure that staff are aware of mental health resources.
  • Orient staff on how to provide psychological first aid to the affected.
  • Ensure that mental health emergencies are managed in healthcare facilities.
  • Ensure availability of essential psychiatric medications at all levels of health care.
  • Offset feelings of anxiety and depression using strong leadership and clear, honest, and open communication.
  • Use widespread screening to identify workers in need of mental health support.
  • Provide organizational support
  • Facilitate peer support.
  • Rotate work schedules to mitigate stress.
  • Implement interventions tailored to local needs and provide positive, supportive environments.

For child caregivers

  • Role model healthy behaviors, routines, and coping skills.
  • Use a positive parenting approach based on communication and respect.
  • Maintain family routines and provide age-appropriate activities to teach children responsibility.
  • Explain COVID-19 and required interventions in age-appropriate ways.
  • Monitor children's social media.
  • Validate children's thoughts and feelings and help them find positive ways to express emotions.
  • Avoid separating children from their parents/caregivers as much as possible. Ensure regular contact with parents and caregivers, for children in isolation.

For older adults, people with underlying health conditions, and their caregivers

  • Older adults, those especially in isolation or suffering from pre-existing conditions, may become more anxious, angry, or withdrawn. Provide practical and emotional support through caregivers and healthcare professionals.
  • Share facts on the crisis and give clear information about how to reduce infection risk.
  • Maintain access to current medications.
  • Find out in advance where and how to get practical help.
  • Learn and perform daily home exercises.
  • Keep regular schedules.
  • Keep in touch with loved ones.
  • Continue hobbies or regular tasks.
  • Talk on the phone or online or do a fun online activity with others.
  • Help your community, e.g., by providing food/meals to others.

For people in isolation

  • Stay connected and maintain social networks.
  • Pay attention to your needs and feelings. Engage in relaxing activities.
  • Avoid listening to rumors.
  • Begin new activities.
  • Maintain routines.

CDC stated that citizens should "try to do enjoyable activities and return to normal life as much as possible" during a crisis. A peer-reviewed study published in 2021 suggests that playing video games may have a positive effect on players' mental health and well-being, providing opportunities for socialization and connection.

Mental health under COVID-19 by population and professions

Individuals with mental health disorders

Due to a lack of pre-COVID comparative data and non-representative sampling, few research were able to clearly identify changes in mental health caused by the COVID-19 environment. However, a study in Belgium compared the registration of mental health problems in primary care during and before the pandemic. They found a relative increase in registered mental health problems during the pandemic, as well as relatively more care provided to patients with mental health problems. Young people, people with pre-existing mental health disorders, and people who are financially disadvantaged have been found to face an increase in declining mental health. Some demographics appear to have been under researched (e.g., culturally and linguistically diverse populations and indigenous peoples), while some research methodologies have not been utilized (e.g. there was a lack of qualitative and mixed-methods studies).

Obsessive–compulsive disorder

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a psychiatric disorder that is extremely common in developing and developed countries alike. The social and collective perception of OCD as an illness albeit, is subjective and varies cross-culturally. As such, data relating to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon sufferers of OCD is skewed because of different cultural influences on behavior and ‘relationships between beliefs’. Those living with OCD have been subject to socioeconomic, pandemic-related stressors, as COVID-19 has been covered across social media and the 24/7 news cycle since its outbreak. These media outlets emanate fear, and the probability of contamination in conjunction with regulatory quarantines and periods of isolation, trigger precautionary compulsions in OCD patients. Such behavior is driven by the ‘psychological distress’ of governmental control and social restrictions.

Post-traumatic stress disorder

Emotions of high stress and loneliness are contributing factors of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the COVID-19 pandemic has provided individuals with conditions in which these symptoms foster. COVID-19 has affected social structures across cultures, and for people living with PTSD, global measures that regulate the body by means of school closures, border restrictions, social distancing, mask wearing and hand washing, expose the ‘population to feelings of intense fear and helplessness’. A study on the psychological distress experiences by health care workers across 21 countries reveals a PTSD prevalence of 21.5%. The Middle East and Europe were both countries of interest in this study, indicating the cross-cultural impact that COVID-19 has had upon PTSD.

Anxiety and depression

An increase of mental health issues such as depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic is a commonly held perception worldwide. Whilst this is true for several western cultures and societies it does not encompass all of the minorities within these cultures. In a study conducted by Giurgescu et al. (2022), it was concluded that levels of perceived anxiety and depression had increased for pregnant African American women during the pandemic. Further to this, they also concluded that pregnant African American women experienced higher levels of loneliness that increased their levels of perceived anxiety, stress, and depression. The higher levels anxiety and depression within this minority can be attributed to several social factors they have had to experience in their lifetime. The history of underlying social inequity and oppression may have paved way for a higher mortality and morbidity rate, job loss and food and housing insecurities. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has affected rates of mental health amongst most western cultures, the people within these demographics are likely to be impacted by historical, social and biological factors that have led to high levels of depression and anxiety irrespective of COVID-19.

Children

On October 19, 2021, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and the Children's Hospital Association declared a “national emergency" for children's mental health.

One study reported that many children who were separated from caregivers during the pandemic experienced a crisis. Children who were isolated or quarantined during past pandemics were more likely to develop acute stress disorders, adjustment disorders and experience grief, with 30% of children meeting the clinical criteria for PTSD. A meta-analysis of 15 studies performed reported that 79.4% of children and teenagers suffered negative consequences: 42.3% were irritable, 41.7% had symptoms of depression, 34.5% struggled with anxiety, and 30.8% had problems with inattention. Many young people struggled with boredom, fear, and sleep problems.

A collection of 29 studies posted in August 2021 by Jamanetwork showed that the prevalence of symptoms of depression and anxiety had doubled during COVID-19. They had also found that older adolescents were affected more and it was the most prevalent in girls.

In an October 2020 global study, negative emotions experienced by students included boredom (45.2%), anxiety (39.8%), frustration (39.1%), anger (25.9%), hopelessness (18.8%), and shame (10.0%). The highest levels of anxiety were found in South America (65.7%) and Oceania (64.4%), followed by North America (55.8%) and Europe (48.7%). The least anxious were students from Africa (38.1%) and Asia (32.7%). A similar order of continents was found for frustration.

School closures caused anxiety for students with special needs as daily routines are disrupted and therapy and social skill groups halted. Others who incorporated school routines into their coping mechanisms experienced an increase in depression and difficulty in readjusting to normal routines. Closures limited mental health service availability, along with educators' ability to identify at-risk youth.

LGBTQ Youth

A National survey that focuses on LGBTQ youth mental health was conducted by The Trevor Project in 2021. This survey highlights some of the specific challenges faced by LGBTQ youth during the Coronavirus pandemic in 2020, like increased restraints on expressing their gender expression and sexuality. The data collected was from about 35,000 LGBTQ people aged 13–24 years old. 45% of youths surveyed were people of color and 38% were transgender or nonbinary. Overall, 70% of LGBTQ youth "stated that their mental health was "poor" most of the time or always during COVID-19", as well as 80% of youths aged 13–17, and 81% of youths aged 18–24, said that COVID-19 negatively impacted their mental health. COVID happened so quickly that it was a difficult adjustment for some LGBTQ youth to have to go back to living at their parent's houses full time, especially when some families of LGBTQ kids were not as accepting of them. Only 1 in 3 LGBTQ youth found their homes to be supportive, and 81% of youths aged 13–17, and 81% of youths aged 18–24, reported that they experienced a more stressful living situation. Many college aged kids came out for the first time while they were at school, so when they had to go back home they had to decide whether or not to tell their parents, who could be potentially unsupportive or even abusive. Younger kids were isolated at home with no access to their friends, guidance counselors, or teachers who were their only potential support systems. 50% of youths aged 13–17, and 42% of youths aged 18–24, said COVID-19 impacted their ability to express their sexual orientation. 65% of youths aged 13–17, and 52% of youths aged 18–24, said that COVID-19 impacted their ability to express their gender identity.

72% of LGBTQ youth reported "symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder" and 62% of LGBTQ youth reported "symptoms of major depressive disorder". In regards to suicide, it was reported that 42% of LGBTQ youth "seriously considered attempting suicide in the past year". 48% of this being youths aged 13–17 and 34% were youths aged 18–24. The percentages of attempted suicides were 31% of Native/Indigenous youth, 21% of Black youth, 21% of multiracial youth, 18% of Latinx youth, 12% of Asian/Pacific Islander youth, and 12% of white youth. Overall, 20% of LGBTQ youths aged 13–17 and 9% of LGBTQ youths aged 18–24 attempted suicide.

Post-traumatic stress disorder

Studies from previous years and epidemics reported that children who were isolated were much more likely to develop PTSD. PTSD in children can have long-term consequences on brain development and affected kids are more likely to develop psychiatric disorders.

Autism spectrum disorder

Pandemic lockdowns impacted mental health outcomes for children with Neurodevelopmental disorders, such as ASD, creating challenges including the lack of understanding about the pandemic and the ability to complete school work. Children on the autism spectrum were more likely to become agitated by the changing environment.

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Adolescents and children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) struggled with staying confined in only one space, creating difficulties for caregivers to find activities that were engaging/meaningful to them.

The impact of COVID-19 restrictions and isolation impacted on children's abilities to use successful coping mechanisms and management techniques for ADHD. Issues of diagnosis and treatment were also prevalent. Primarily, clinicians faced the problem of differentiating between situational and persistent ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents, who did not have the same environmental triggers (i.e. social spheres) which allowed their symptoms to be best evaluated. Those wanting to be evaluated for expression of ADHD symptoms were subject to extensive wait lists for clinical analysis as a result of staff shortages during the pandemic. Those that were offered a positive diagnosis were then further restricted by the limited non-medication based treatment options, such as behavioural and educational therapies. Those children and adolescents already living with diagnosed ADHD were also facing substantial challenges. Studies conducted during the pandemic showed that social isolation and homestay directives led to an increased reliance on screen-time to manage attention problems. A 75% increase in online gaming participation was observed. In some instances, gaming may represent an unhealthy coping mechanism for ADHD youth and has already been demonstrated to exacerbate poor management of symptoms. Furthermore, this excessive screen-time was prolonged by the use of Zoom for learning. Children with ADHD were required to simultaneously process auditory and visual cues during these online classes, leading to 'distracted connection' and mental overstimulation.

Students

A infographic students can use to stay connected to better their mental health

K-12

Schools have been able to play the role of a safety net in many cases where adults look out for the mental health status of their students. In schools teachers and adults are able to be on the look out and recognize physical/emotional distress, signs of physical abuse, and/or sudden significant or subtle changes in behavior. Should they recognize any apparent disruptions, teachers are able to intervene and provide their students with the necessary resources to help them. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, with students and teachers out, this system has not been in place. When schools shut down, teachers had to resort to online learning where they were no longer able to see how students were doing physically/mentally and weren't able to provide them with the help they needed. With the lack of resources to help students, it resulted in a drastic increase in depression and anxiety rates, increasing by over 20%. Since students were suffering mentally, it became challenging for them to have the motivation to do their school work.

As COVID-19 mitigation efforts began to ease up and students return to the classroom, teachers have noticed an increase in crying and disruptive behavior in this population of students and also increased occurrences in violence and bullying. Mental health professionals call for schools and education institutions everywhere to implement a number of health promotion programs in their schools that may teach students how to prevent succumbing to adverse mental health issues and how to cope with the reality and continuing effects of COVID-19 so that it does not get in the way of their education and future endeavors.

Higher education

Studies conducted in the first stages of the pandemic found the age group of the average higher education student (i.e. 18–24-year-olds) among the most affected in terms of mental health.

The Higher Education Policy Institute conducted a study that reported that 63% of students claimed that their mental health had worsened, and that 38% demonstrated satisfaction with the mental health service access. Physical harm such as overdose, suicide and substance abuse reached an all-time high. Academic stress, dissatisfaction with the quality of teaching and fear of infection were associated with higher depression scores.

Involvement in a steady relationship and living with others were associated with lower depressive scores. Research reported that psychological stress following strict confinement was moderated by levels of the pre-pandemic stress hormone cortisol and individual coping skills. Stay-at-home orders that worsened self-reports of stress also increased cognitive abilities including perspective taking and working memory. However, that greater emotion regulation (measured pre-pandemic) was associated with lower acute stress (measured by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised) in response to the early pandemic in the US during lockdown. Students who experienced a death of a close family member, a known stressor, were more likely to decide to stay home and attend college virtually.

Isolation from others and lack of contact with mental health services worsened symptoms. The specific level of impact on students reflected their demographic backgrounds: students from low-income households and students of color experienced greater mental health and academic impacts. Students who struggle with mental health also struggled academically. Students from high-income households and those in successful school districts were more likely to have to mental health (and other) resources.

A study in Belgian higher education students found the following factors to be associated with higher scores of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic: academic stress, dissatisfaction with the quality of teaching, fear of being infected, higher levels of frustration and boredom, inadequate supplies of resources, inadequate information from public health authorities, insufficient financial resources and perceived stigma. These factors were in line with a review that identified a comprehensive set of mental health stressors playing a role in people who were quarantined to limit the transmission of pathogens similar to COVID-19.

Individuals with a known history of psychiatric disorders were more vulnerable to experience heightened levels of distress during lockdown measures. Specifically, researchers saw an increase in the amount of eating disorders related vulnerabilities. Social isolation that accompanies lockdown and stay at home measures for many resulted in a decrease in physical movement and activity, an increased amount of food in the home, and an increased time spent with a screen. There was an increase of 10% of student's perception of their body and the description of their weight as a risk factor for acquiring an eating disorder and exhibiting symptoms during the months between January 2020 and April 2020. After lockdown ended, student's levels of physical activity remained below their pre-pandemic levels, even for those attending colleges that resumed in-person instruction.

Studies showed that although college students did not have significant increases in their BMI, the rates in which college students were concerned about gaining weight and subsequent increases in their BMI significantly increased.

An international survey conducted in Norway, USA, UK, and Australia at the end of 2020 found that university students in higher education had poorer mental health than non-students.

A research study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) looked into data gathered from a nationwide survey of high school students during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data collected revealed disturbingly high incidences of worsening mental health, with 37.1% of students saying they experienced poor mental health during the pandemic, and 31.1% reporting poor mental health during the first 30 days after the original survey. Also students reported that 12 months before the survey how they were feeling with 44.2% saying they experienced persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness, while 19.9% had deeply considered attempting suicide, and 9.0% had attempted suicide. Based on the data, the pandemic increased stress, anxiety and depression amongst high school students mainly because of social isolation, online learning difficulties, and familial conflicts.

This study sheds light on the importance of being connected to school, family, and community groups especially during a time of prime development. Students who were able to maintain these aspects of life were found to have lower rates of poor mental health and suicidal thoughts/behaviors.

Women

Studies in China have shown that females have high risk factors of physiological impact including stress, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress that intensify due to the pandemic.

Mothers, who are most commonly in charge of caregiving and childcare reported feeling agitated, scared, depressed, and anxious due to the lack of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Many women lost their jobs or quit their jobs to avoid infecting family members. Through becoming unemployed, women faced an increase in caregiving roles at home. Women also dealt with grief of losing loved ones to the pandemic which took a toll on their mental health.

A 2020 Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that 57% of women reported mental health issues due to the stress the pandemic caused them.

Studies show that women are highly susceptible to physical violence and suffer from economic inequality during the pandemic.

Single women have less support and more roles to take on so the pandemic promoted more stress and less time to work on their mental health.

The unknown effects of SARS-CoV-2 on the developing fetus, limited treatment options, and reduced available resources leave many women facing the difficult decision of whether to try to conceive or delay pregnancy. For example, in one study, 37.3% of survey participants who wanted children before the COVID-19 pandemic no longer wanted children.

Pregnant women

During pregnancy, women often experience heightened symptoms of depression and anxiety. The COVID-19 pandemic caused an increase in stress and anxiety for nearly everyone worldwide, but more vulnerable groups such as pregnant women, were especially at risk of suffering the psychological effects. The pandemic resulted in heightened mental health issues for vulnerable groups, such as pregnant and postpartum women, because of the ‘physiological and psychological changes’ the body undergoes during the stages of pregnancy. Women who were already experiencing an increase in stress, depression, and anxiety due to the changes in hormones that occur during pregnancy, suffered an increase in symptoms associated with mental health issues as the pandemic progressed.

COVID-19 increases fear and worries of vulnerability due to the unclear understanding of how COVID-19 impacts pregnancy. A 2020 study in China of 4,124 pregnant women found that after they learned that COVID-19 could be spread from human to human their scores on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale were much higher. They showed increased anxiety levels, depression levels, and suicidal thoughts.

A 2020 study in Canada of 1,987 pregnant women showed results that 37% of the women showed depression symptoms, 46.3% showed high anxiety levels, and 67.6% showed an increase in pregnancy-correlated anxiety.

Pregnant women that tested positive for COVID-19 faced complications including preterm birth, premature rupture of membranes, fetal distress, stillbirth, and placental infections.

More than one third of Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scores in pregnant women were above normal during the pandemic in a study conducted by Durankus.

The possible threats that COVID-19 put on the mother and child's life and how it could possibly impact proper prenatal care correlated to higher levels of stress, depression and anxiety. Anxiety in pregnant women increased as they thought about the possibility of being infected, changing birth plans, running out of food or essentials, and the uncertainty of how Covid would impact their labor process.

Latina immigrant women

A 2018-2020 study found that Latina immigrants declared facing discrimination and stigma from others who believed that they had the COVID-19 disease. This kind of treatment impacted or even worsened their mental health. Latina immigrants were given an increase in caregiving roles with little support from others during the pandemic which played a role in their poor mental health and wellbeing.

Studies have shown higher levels of depression and anxiety in Latina immigrants compared to before the pandemic. Latina immigrants already dealt with economic stress before the pandemic but COVID-19 escalated their stress through isolation, fear, lack of support, services and resources.

Spanish women

A 2020 study of Barcelona women compared their anxiety and depression levels during the initial days of lockdown and then 5 weeks after lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results showed that their anxiety levels went from 8.5% to 17.6% and their depression levels went from 7.7% to 22.5%.

Their results showed a correlation of higher risks of anxiety and depression with women who have unstable personalities and women who can't easily control negative emotions. The pandemic increased stress which impacted those vulnerable to handling stressful situations.[94]

Women who dealt with economic issues, and unemployment during the pandemic showed poor mental health but women with the neuroticism trait were most vulnerable to mental health issues during pandemic.

Turkish women

A survey conducted in Turkey in 2020 concluded that younger women and women who are in school showed higher mental burnout. The shift from in-person learning to online learning negatively affected women's mental health.

Women had to balance school, work, and caregiving during the pandemic which caused them to burnout and have an increase in stress. They also worried about testing positing and possibly spreading the disease since they were working and coming home during the pandemic.

Staying at home while being restricted from socializing created a negative impact on women's mental wellbeing; they become exhausted, lonely, stressed, and worried.

Asian Americans

Hate crimes targeted towards Asians rose nearly 150% across major U.S. cities from 2019 to 2020. As the pandemic progressed, about 40% of Asian and Black Americans reported that people felt uncomfortable around them. The harassment against those of Asian descent ranges in its forms; these include both verbal and physical attacks, and even acts of vandalism. Some attest the increase in attack rates to the negative expressions used by President Donald Trump, an example of this being when he referred to the COVID-19 virus as "kung flu."

Asian Americans disproportionately hold positions as high-risk essential workers, and many regions heavily affected by COVID-19 have an abundance of Asian-owned businesses. Suggestions for aiding in the support of Asian Americans throughout this time include ensuring Asian inclusion in businesses, preventing the use of Anti-Asian rhetoric, and encouraging a dialogue that accounts for the acknowledgement of Asian American treatment and support throughout this time.

African Americans

African Americans have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and died at a disproportionately higher rate. Many factors contributed to this outcome. African Americans disproportionately represent service industry workers. These essential workers have a higher risk of exposure to COVID-19 due to the inability to shelter at home.

The contributing factors to this disparity are the limited public testing available, an increase in low-wage worker unemployment, lack of healthcare, medical racism/biases, and a higher rate of pre-existing conditions. Due to these disparities, the Black-White life expectancy gap is expected to increase by 40%, from 3.6 years to over five years.

Essential workers

Key workers did not shift to remote work despite low availability of PPE and while risks from the virus were undetermined. These workers earn modest wages on average and are more likely to be racial/ethnic minorities.

Low income workers

Fewer than 5% of US workers without a high school diploma were remote workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Only 7% of US service workers, the majority of whom were low-wage customer-facing workers, could use remote work. Service industry workers were the least likely to get compensated for time off. The pandemic's nationwide economic implications resulted in business closures and record unemployment rates. Low-wage and part-time workers were those most likely to be unemployed and people of color (especially women) had disproportionate job losses compared to the general population.

Frontline workers during the Pandemic were experiencing an increase in workload which made them more likely to suffer from stress, depression and PTSD.

Healthcare workers

Before COVID-19, healthcare workers already faced many stressors, including health risks, the possibility of infecting their household, and the stress of working with extremely sick patients. COVID-19's physical and emotional burden impacted healthcare workers increased rates of anxiety, depression, and burnout that impacted sleep, quality work/empathy towards patients, and suicide rates.

Cases of anxiety and depression within healthcare workers who interact with COVID-19 patients increased by 1.57% and 1.52% respectively.

One study reported that frontline nurses experience higher rates of anxiety, emotional exhaustion, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder.

A cross-sectional study using an online survey in Southern California examined stress levels before and during the pandemic. The study used the 10-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale to assess psychological stress and resilience in nurses. The experiment concluded that nurses reported feeling moderate and high levels of stress compared to before the pandemic.

A five-part questionnaire conducted among healthcare workers in Ghana to examine the correlation between COVID-19 and mental health. The questionnaire classified participant fears as "none", "mild", "moderate", and "extreme". Participants also answered and ranked questions about depression using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS). Because the DASS-21 assessment is split up into three categories, (Depression, Anxiety and Stress), participants provided three numbers, one for each category. The fourth part assessed whether participants perceived that they were provided with a good psychological environment. The fifth part assessed coping success. Over 40% of health staff reported mild to extreme fear. Depression ranked highest with 16%. However, only 30% received their salary, and only 40% were insured in case of infection. 42% of respondents in Ghana proved that their hospitals do not provide sufficient protective equipment.

Hospitals in China such as The Second Xiangya Hospital (Psychology Research Center), and the Chinese Medical and Psychological Disease Clinical Medicine Research Center noticed signs of psychological distress and set up a plan to help struggling staff. They suggested coping strategies for stress, a hotline, and education. Healthcare workers stated that all they needed was uninterrupted rest as well as more supplies. Moreover, medical staff in China agreed to use psychologists’ skills to help them deal with distressed patients. They suggested having mental health specialists ready when a patient becomes emotionally distressed.

Initially, healthcare workers experienced fear over possible exposure. This fear correlated to significant mental health declines amongst nurses.

Increased patient workloads contributed to mental health impacts. Patient counts in hospitals increased during seasonal waves, sometimes overloading hospitals. A majority of medical professionals experienced higher patient workloads. Limitations on family visitation increased staff demands.

Anxiety in healthcare workers rose. Anxiety directly correlates with worker performance. One study reported that 13% of COVID nurses and 16% of other COVID healthcare workers reported severe anxiety. Another study surveyed workers in March 2020 and again in May and reported that psychological distress and anxiety had increased. Other studies reported that the pandemic had led at least one in five healthcare professionals to report symptoms of anxiety. Specifically, anxiety was assessed in 12 studies, with a pooled prevalence of 23.2%.

One study reported that things changed drastically in a couple of months after the pandemic began. It found that the prevalence rates of post-COVID anxiety were about 32%. Participants with moderate to extremely severe anxiety made up 26% of the sample. Individuals who worked during the pandemic reported higher rates of anxiety. In another study, 42% of patient care respondents had significantly more anxiety than providers who did not care directly for patients.

Increased depression and burnout were observed in healthcare workers. In one study more than 28% of the sample reported high levels of emotional exhaustion. More than 50% of the sample reported low levels of depersonalization, except for COVID nurses and physicians, 37% of whom reported depersonalization. Another study reported that the prevalence rates of depression were as high as 22% and that extremely severe depression occurred in 13%.

In a cross-sectional survey, a high percentage of the nurses surveyed reported high stress levels and/or PTSD symptoms. Eight major themes were identified:

  • working in an isolated environment
  • PPE shortage and the discomfort of pronged usage
  • sleep problems
  • intensity of workload
  • cultural and language barriers
  • lack of family support
  • fear of being infected
  • insufficient work experiences with COVID-19.

Many of these concerns are related to the pandemic. Healthcare understaffing not only affects patient health but can rebound against healthcare workers. A study found that 70+% of doctors and nurses perceived moderate-to-severe stress. The study reported that direct dealing with COVID-19 patients significantly increases stress. Without intervention the nursing staff and patients would struggle.

Other mental health consequences

Relationships

The stress of the pandemic was cited as being a major cause in the increased numbers of break-ups and divorces which was observable from mid-2020 onwards as the upheaval of societal norms prompted people to reconsider their lives, relationships and jobs. Relationship experts noted that people often do not recognize the impact that stress can have on a relationship and a couple's ability to be good partners to each other. Some of the causes cited included the stresses brought about by living in cramped and shared spaces, arguments over the division of housework, and differing attitudes towards the seriousness of the virus with some partners choosing not to observe government guidelines over quarantine, mask mandates, or vaccinations. The influence of unemployment and/or wage decreases brought about as a result of the pandemic was also cited, noting that this can manifest as anxiety, anger and frustration as well as an increased likelihood of domestic abuse.

A survey by Relate, a UK relationship-support charity, in April 2020 found that nearly a quarter of people had felt that lockdown had been placing additional pressures on their relationship. In couples where one party chose to get vaccinated while the other did not, tensions arose over the anger felt towards the partner for depriving them of their chance to enjoy life again. As the pandemic took away “well-established routines that offered comfort, stability and rhythm”, according to Ronen Stilman, a psychotherapist and spokesperson for the UK Council for Psychotherapy, it left many partners around the world with limited opportunities to “seek other forms of support or stimulation” beyond their relationship, which put them under severe strain. The pandemic was also noted as acting as a catalyst for break-ups that may have been impending already, especially when the previous separate routines of partners had served to mask problems in this regard. As of December 2020 it was noted the number of couples seeking relationship counseling had "surged" during lockdown. As 2020 drew to a close, divorce rates around the world had noticeably increased with many previously content couples having separated due to the cumulative stresses brought about by COVID-19. British law firm Stewarts logged a 122% increase in enquiries between July and October 2020, compared with the same period in 2019. In the US, 'Legal Templates', a legal contract-creation site, reported a 34% increase in sales of its basic divorce agreement, in the first half of 2020, compared to the same time period in 2019. It was reported that newlyweds married in the previous five months to that made up 20% of these sales. A noticeable increase in the number of applications for divorce during the coronavirus pandemic also occurred in Sweden. The UK charity Citizens Advice reported a spike in searches for online advice on ending a relationship. In January 2022 it was revealed the U.K.’s largest family law firm reported a 95% increase in divorce inquiries during the pandemic (detecting a majority of inquiries coming from women).

As vaccinations began to be extended to children, differences of opinion between parents also strained marriages and relationships.

Suicides

The pandemic triggered concern over increased suicides, caused by social isolation due to quarantine and social-distancing guidelines, fear, and unemployment and financial factors. A 2020 study reported that suicide rates were either the same or lower than before the pandemic began, especially in higher income countries, as often happens in crises.

The number of crisis hotlines calls increased, and some countries established new hotlines. For example, Ireland launched a new hotline aimed at older generations that received around 16,000 calls in its first month in March 2020. The Kids Helpline in the Australian state of Victoria reported a 184% increase in calls from suicidal teenagers between early December 2020 and late May 2021.

A March 2020 survey of over 700,000 people in the UK reported that 1 in 10 people had suicidal thoughts as a result of lockdown. Charities such as the Martin Gallier Project as of November 2020 had intervened in 1,024 suicides during the pandemic.

Suicide cases remained constant or decreased, although the best evidence is often delayed. According to a study conducted on twenty-one high and upper-middle-income countries in April–July 2020, the number of suicides remained static. These results were attributed to factors, including the composition of mental health support, financial assistance, family/community support, use of technology to connect, and time spent with family members. Despite this, isolation, fear, stigma, abuse, and economic fallout increased. Self-reported levels of depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts were elevated during lockdown, according to evidence from several countries, but did not appear to have increased suicides.

According to CDC surveys conducted in June 2020, 10.7 percent of adults aged 18 and up said they had seriously considered suicide in the previous 30 days. They ranged in age from 18 to 24 and were classified as members of minority racial/ethnic groups, unpaid caregivers, and essential workers.

Few studies have been conducted to examine suicides in low- and lower-middle-income countries. WHO stated, “in 2016, low- and middle-income countries accounted for 79 percent of global suicides.” This is because of registration system limitations, and lack of real-time suicide data.

Middle income Myanmar and Tunisia were studied along with low-income Malawi. The study reported that, “In Malawi, there was reportedly a 57% increase in January–August 2020, compared with January–August 2019, and in Tunisia, there was a 5% increase in March–May 2020, compared with March–May, 2019. By contrast, in Myanmar, there was a 2% decrease in January–June 2020, compared with January–June 2019.”

Factors

Damage to the economy is associated with higher suicide rates. The pandemic put many businesses on hold, led to reduced employment, and triggered a major stock market drop.

Stigma is a primary cause. Frontline workers, the elderly, the homeless, migrants, and daily wage workers were more vulnerable. Stigma led to reported suicides in infected individuals in Bangladesh and India.

China

Studies reported that the outbreak had a significant impact on mental health, with an increase in health anxiety, acute stress reactions, adjustment disorders, depression, panic attacks, and insomnia. Relapses and increased hospitalization rates are occurring in cases of severe mental disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and anxiety disorders. All of which increase suicide risks. National surveys in China (and Italy) revealed a high prevalence of depression and anxiety, both of which increase suicide risks.

One Shanghai district reported 14 cases of suicides among primary and secondary school students as of June 2020, more than annual averages. Domestic media reported additional suicides by young people even though topics like suicide are usually avoided in Chinese society.

Fiji

In September 2021, mental health organizations and an advisor to the government urged the government to address suicide prevention, although suicides in 2020 were lower than in 2019, as they warned that Fiji was beginning to suffer from a "mental health epidemic."

India

Alcohol bans during the pandemic reportedly led to suicides in India.

Japan

One study reported that people had been influenced by anxiety- and trauma-related disorders and by adverse societal dynamics relating to work and PPE shortages.

Overall, suicide rates in Japan appeared to decrease 20% at the beginning, partly offset by a rise in August 2020.

Counseling helplines by telephone or text message are provided by many organizations.

On September 20, 2020, Sankei Shimbun reported that the month of July and August saw more suicides than in the previous year due to the pandemic's economic impact. Estimates for suicide deaths include a 7.7% increase or a 15.1% increase in August 2020, compared to August 2019. Sankei Shimbun further reported that rates increased more among women, with the month of August seeing a 40.1% increase in suicide compared to August 2019.

United States

As of November 2020, the rate of deaths from suicide appeared to be unchanged in the US. In Clark County, Nevada, 18 high school students committed suicide over nine months of school closures. In March 2020, the federal crisis hotline, Disaster Distress Helpline, received a 338% increase in calls compared to February and an 891% increase in calls compared to March 2019. Suicide rates increased for African Americans.

Mental health under COVID-19 by region

An infographic from the World Health Organization showing statistics related to the impact of COVID-19 on mental health

COVID-19 lockdowns were first used in China and later worldwide by national and state governments. Most workplaces, schools, and public places were closed. Lockdowns closed most mental health centers. Patients who already had mental health disorders may have worsened symptoms.

China

A psychological intervention plan was developed by the Second Xiangya Hospital, the Institute of Mental Health, the Medical Psychology Research Center of the Second Xiangya Hospital, and the Chinese Medical and Psychological Disease Clinical Medicine Research Center. It focused on building an intervention medical team to provide online courses for medical staff, a hotline team, and interventions. Online education and counseling services were created for social media platforms such as WeChat, Weibo, and TikTok. Printed books about mental health and COVID-19 were republished online. Free electronic copies were available through the Chinese Association for Mental Health.

South Africa

South Africa implemented a strict lockdown on 26 March 2020 that lasted until 1 June. Of the 860 respondents to an online questionnaire in May 2020, 46% met the diagnostic criteria of anxiety disorder and 47% met the diagnostic criteria of depressive disorder. The participants who met these criteria reported substantial daily life repercussions, but fewer than 20% consulted a formal practitioner. Distress over lockdown and fear of infection were associated with anxiety and depressive symptoms. Pre-existing mental health conditions, younger age, female sex, and living in a non-rural area were associated with more anxiety and depressive symptoms.

Japan

In July 2020, Japan was in "mild lockdown", which was not enforced and was non-punitive. A study of 11,333 individuals across Japan were asked to evaluate the impact of a one-month lockdown, answering questions related to lifestyle, stress management, and stressors. It suggested that psychological distress indices significantly correlated with items relating to COVID-19.

Italy

Italy was the first country to enter a nationwide lockdown. According to a questionnaire, 21% of participants reported moderate to extremely high depression, while 19% reported moderate to extremely high anxiety. Moreover, about 41% reported poor sleep before the lockdown, increasing to 52% during the lockdown. A cross-sectional study of 1,826 Italian adults confirmed the lockdown's impact on sleep quality, which was especially prevalent among females, those less educated, and those who experienced financial problems.

Spain

Spain's outbreak started at the end of February. On March 14, 2020, the Spanish Government declared the state of alarm to limit viral transmission. However, by 9 April Spain reported the second highest rate of confirmed cases and deaths. 36% of participants reported moderate to severe psychological impact, 25% showed mild to severe levels of anxiety, 41% reported depressive symptoms, and 41% felt stressed. A longitudinal study collected data pre-pandemic and during confinement. It reported direct and indirect effects of pre-pandemic cortisol on the changes in self-reported, perceived self-efficacy during confinement. The indirect effects were mediated by increases in working memory span and cognitive empathy. Other longitudinal study reported that older adults did not evidence higher emotional distress than during the initial lockdown. Furthermore, depression remained stable and anxiety significantly decreased. Older adults may adapt to the adverse pandemic impact by using more adaptive resources that reduce their distress.

Vietnam

As of January 2021, Vietnam had largely returned to everyday life. The government employed effective communication, early development of test kits, contact tracing, and containment based upon epidemiological risk rather than symptoms. By appealing to universal Vietnamese values such as tam giao (Three Teachings), the Vietnamese government encouraged a culture that values public health. However, Vietnamese patients quarantining reported psychological strain associated with the stigma of sickness, financial constraints, and guilt from contracting the virus. Frontline healthcare workers at Bach Mai Hospital in Hanoi who quarantined for greater than three weeks reported comparatively poorer self-image and general attitude when compared to shorter term isolees.

United Kingdom

A 2022 study assessed the levels of mental wellbeing and potential for clinical need in a sample of UK university students aged 18–25 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study has found "higher levels of lockdown severity were prospectively associated with higher levels of depressive symptoms. Nearly all students had at least one mental wellbeing concern at either time point." The results suggest that lockdown has caused "a wellbeing crisis in young people."

United States

The government loosened Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations through a limited waiver. It allowed clinicians to evaluate and treat individuals though video chatting services that were not previously permitted, allowing patients to receive remote care. On October 5, 2020, then-president Donald Trump issued an executive order to address mental and behavioral health issues, establishing a Coronavirus Mental Health Working Group. In the executive order, he cited a CDC report that found that during June 24–30, 2020, 40.9% of more than 5,000 Americans reported at least one adverse mental or behavioral health condition, and 10.7% had seriously considered suicide during the month preceding the survey. On 9 November 2020, a study reported findings from an electronic health record network cohort study using data from nearly 70 million individuals, including 62,354 individuals. Nearly 20% of COVID-19 survivors were diagnosed with a psychiatric condition between 14 and 90 days after diagnosis, including 5.8% first-time psychiatric diagnoses. Among patients without previous psychiatric history, patients hospitalized for COVID-19 had increased incidence of a first psychiatric diagnosis compared to other health events analyzed. Together, these findings suggest that COVID-19 may increase psychiatric sequelae, and those with pre-existing psychiatric conditions may be at increased risk for COVID-19.

Mental health aftercare

Academics theorized that once the pandemic stabilizes or ends, supervisors should allow time for first responders, essential workers, and the general population to reflect and create a meaningful narrative rather than focusing on the trauma. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended active monitoring of staff for issues such as PTSD, moral injuries, and other associated mental illness.

Telemental health

Delivering mental health services through telecommunications technology (mostly videoconferencing and phone calls), also known as telepsychiatry or telemental health, became common. Due to lockdowns or ‘stay at home’ orders at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health services in high-income countries were able to adapt existing service provision to telemental health care. Estimates suggest that between 48% and 100% of service users who were already receiving care at the start of the pandemic were able to continue their mental health care using remote methods. Some face-to-face appointments still took place if necessary.

The benefits of telemental health include accessibility, increased safety due to less in-person contact, and reducing the use of scarce personal protective equipment. The role of telemental health and telehealth in lowering fatality rates and preventing increased presence in high-risk areas such as hospitals was generally significant.

A recent study of COVID-19 and Open Notes reports promising evidence of patients’ benefits when reading their clinical notes online from mental health care. When patients read their clinical notes from mental health care, they report an increased understanding of their mental health, feeling in control of their care, and enhancing trust in their clinician. Patients’ are also reported to get feelings of greater validation, engagement, remembering their care plan, and acquiring a better awareness of potential side effects of their medications.

Long-term consequences

According to the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support, the pandemic produced long-term consequences. Deterioration of social networks and economies, survivor stigma, anger and aggression, and mistrust of official information are long-term consequences.

While some consequences reflect realistic dangers, others stem from lack of knowledge. Many community members show altruism and cooperation in a crisis, and some experience satisfaction from helping others. Some may have positive experiences, such as pride about coping. One study examined how individuals cope and find meaning across 30 countries. The study reported that people who were able to reframe their experiences in a positive way had lower levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. Gender, socioeconomic factors, physical health, and country of origin were not associated with outcome measures. Another study of nearly 10,000 participants from 78 countries found similar results, with 40% reporting well-being. Another study reported that positive stressor reframing allowed individuals to view the adversity as a growth opportunity, rather than a crisis to be avoided.

Once recovered from COVID-19, many will continue to experience long-term effects of the virus. Of these effects may include a lost or lessened sense of taste and smell, which is a result of the virus affecting cells in the nose. While this symptom is not fatal, an absence of these senses for a prolonged amount of time can cause lack of appetite, anxiety, and depression. Those admitted to the ICU while battling their direct infection of the COVID-19 virus experience mental health consequences as a result of this stay, including PTSD, anxiety, and depression.

Medical ethics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are several codes of conduct. The Hippocratic Oath discusses basic principles for medical professionals. This document dates back to the fifth century BCE. Both The Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and The Nuremberg Code (1947) are two well-known and well respected documents contributing to medical ethics. Other important markings in the history of medical ethics include Roe v. Wade in 1973 and the development of hemodialysis in the 1960s. With hemodialysis now available, but a limited number of dialysis machines to treat patients, an ethical question arose on which patients to treat and which ones not to treat, and which factors to use in making such a decision. More recently, new techniques for gene editing aiming at treating, preventing and curing diseases utilizing gene editing, are raising important moral questions about their applications in medicine and treatments as well as societal impacts on future generations.

As this field continues to develop and change throughout history, the focus remains on fair, balanced, and moral thinking across all cultural and religious backgrounds around the world. The field of medical ethics encompasses both practical application in clinical settings and scholarly work in philosophy, history, and sociology.

Medical ethics encompasses beneficence, autonomy, and justice as they relate to conflicts such as euthanasia, patient confidentiality, informed consent, and conflicts of interest in healthcare. In addition, medical ethics and culture are interconnected as different cultures implement ethical values differently, sometimes placing more emphasis on family values and downplaying the importance of autonomy. This leads to an increasing need for culturally sensitive physicians and ethical committees in hospitals and other healthcare settings.

Medical ethics relationships

Medical ethics defines relationships in the following directions:

a medical worker — a patient;

a medical worker — a healthy person (relatives);

a medical worker — a medical worker.

Medical ethics includes provisions on medical confidentiality, medical errors, iatrogenesis, duties of the doctor and the patient.

Medical ethics is closely related to bioethics, but these are not identical concepts. Since the science of bioethics arose in an evolutionary way in the continuation of the development of medical ethics, it covers a wider range of issues.

Medical ethics is also related to the law. But ethics and law are not identical concepts. More often than not, ethics implies a higher standard of behavior than the law dictates.

History

A 12th-century Byzantine manuscript of the Hippocratic Oath
AMA Code of Medical Ethics

The term medical ethics first dates back to 1803, when English author and physician Thomas Percival published a document describing the requirements and expectations of medical professionals within medical facilities. The Code of Ethics was then adapted in 1847, relying heavily on Percival's words. Over the years in 1903, 1912, and 1947, revisions have been made to the original document. The practice of medical ethics is widely accepted and practiced throughout the world.

Historically, Western medical ethics may be traced to guidelines on the duty of physicians in antiquity, such as the Hippocratic Oath, and early Christian teachings. The first code of medical ethics, Formula Comitis Archiatrorum, was published in the 5th century, during the reign of the Ostrogothic Christian king Theodoric the Great. In the medieval and early modern period, the field is indebted to Islamic scholarship such as Ishaq ibn Ali al-Ruhawi (who wrote the Conduct of a Physician, the first book dedicated to medical ethics), Avicenna's Canon of Medicine and Muhammad ibn Zakariya ar-Razi (known as Rhazes in the West), Jewish thinkers such as Maimonides, Roman Catholic scholastic thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas, and the case-oriented analysis (casuistry) of Catholic moral theology. These intellectual traditions continue in Catholic, Islamic and Jewish medical ethics.

By the 18th and 19th centuries, medical ethics emerged as a more self-conscious discourse. In England, Thomas Percival, a physician and author, crafted the first modern code of medical ethics. He drew up a pamphlet with the code in 1794 and wrote an expanded version in 1803, in which he coined the expressions "medical ethics" and "medical jurisprudence". However, there are some who see Percival's guidelines that relate to physician consultations as being excessively protective of the home physician's reputation. Jeffrey Berlant is one such critic who considers Percival's codes of physician consultations as being an early example of the anti-competitive, "guild"-like nature of the physician community. In addition, since the mid 19th century up to the 20th century, physician-patient relationships that once were more familiar became less prominent and less intimate, sometimes leading to malpractice, which resulted in less public trust and a shift in decision-making power from the paternalistic physician model to today's emphasis on patient autonomy and self-determination.

In 1815, the Apothecaries Act was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It introduced compulsory apprenticeship and formal qualifications for the apothecaries of the day under the license of the Society of Apothecaries. This was the beginning of regulation of the medical profession in the UK.

In 1847, the American Medical Association adopted its first code of ethics, with this being based in large part upon Percival's work. While the secularized field borrowed largely from Catholic medical ethics, in the 20th century a distinctively liberal Protestant approach was articulated by thinkers such as Joseph Fletcher. In the 1960s and 1970s, building upon liberal theory and procedural justice, much of the discourse of medical ethics went through a dramatic shift and largely reconfigured itself into bioethics.

Well-known medical ethics cases include:

Since the 1970s, the growing influence of ethics in contemporary medicine can be seen in the increasing use of Institutional Review Boards to evaluate experiments on human subjects, the establishment of hospital ethics committees, the expansion of the role of clinician ethicists, and the integration of ethics into many medical school curricula.

COVID-19

In December 2019, the virus COVID-19 emerged as a threat to worldwide public health and, over the following years, ignited novel inquiry into modern-age medical ethics. For example, since the first discovery of COVID-19 in Wuhan, China and subsequent global spread by mid-2020, calls for the adoption of open science principles dominated research communities. Some academics believed that open science principles — like constant communication between research groups, rapid translation of study results into public policy, and transparency of scientific processes to the public — represented the only solutions to halt the impact of the virus. Others, however, cautioned that these interventions may lead to side-stepping safety in favor of speed, wasteful use of research capital, and creation of public confusion. Drawbacks of these practices include resource-wasting and public confusion surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as treatment for COVID-19 — a combination which was later shown to have no impact on COVID-19 survivorship and carried notable cardiotoxic side-effects — as well as a type of vaccine hesitancy specifically due to the speed at which COVID-19 vaccines were created and made publicly available. However, open science also allowed for the rapid implementation of life-saving public interventions like wearing masks and social distancing, the rapid development of multiple vaccines and monoclonal antibodies that have significantly lowered transmission and death rates, and increased public awareness about the severity of the pandemic as well as explanation of daily protective actions against COVID-19 infection, like hand washing.

Other notable areas of medicine impacted by COVID-19 ethics include:

The ethics of COVID-19 spans many more areas of medicine and society than represented in this paragraph — some of these principles will likely not be discovered until the end of the pandemic which, as of September 12, 2022, is still ongoing.

Values

A common framework used when analysing medical ethics is the "four principles" approach postulated by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress in their textbook Principles of Biomedical Ethics. It recognizes four basic moral principles, which are to be judged and weighed against each other, with attention given to the scope of their application. The four principles are:

  • Respect for autonomy – the patient has the right to refuse or choose their treatment.
  • Beneficence – a practitioner should act in the best interest of the patient.
  • Non-maleficence – to not be the cause of harm. Also, "Utility" – to promote more good than harm.
  • Justice – concerns the distribution of scarce health resources, and the decision of who gets what treatment.

Autonomy

The principle of autonomy, broken down into "autos" (self) and "nomos (rule), views the rights of an individual to self-determination. This is rooted in society's respect for individuals' ability to make informed decisions about personal matters with freedom. Autonomy has become more important as social values have shifted to define medical quality in terms of outcomes that are important to the patient and their family rather than medical professionals. The increasing importance of autonomy can be seen as a social reaction against the "paternalistic" tradition within healthcare. Some have questioned whether the backlash against historically excessive paternalism in favor of patient autonomy has inhibited the proper use of soft paternalism to the detriment of outcomes for some patients.

The definition of autonomy is the ability of an individual to make a rational, uninfluenced decision. Therefore, it can be said that autonomy is a general indicator of a healthy mind and body. The progression of many terminal diseases are characterized by loss of autonomy, in various manners and extents. For example, dementia, a chronic and progressive disease that attacks the brain can induce memory loss and cause a decrease in rational thinking, almost always results in the loss of autonomy.

Psychiatrists and clinical psychologists are often asked to evaluate a patient's capacity for making life-and-death decisions at the end of life. Persons with a psychiatric condition such as delirium or clinical depression may lack capacity to make end-of-life decisions. For these persons, a request to refuse treatment may be taken in the context of their condition. Unless there is a clear advance directive to the contrary, persons lacking mental capacity are treated according to their best interests. This will involve an assessment involving people who know the person best to what decisions the person would have made had they not lost capacity. Persons with the mental capacity to make end-of-life decisions may refuse treatment with the understanding that it may shorten their life. Psychiatrists and psychologists may be involved to support decision making.

Beneficence

The term beneficence refers to actions that promote the well-being of others. In the medical context, this means taking actions that serve the best interests of patients and their families. However, uncertainty surrounds the precise definition of which practices do in fact help patients.

James Childress and Tom Beauchamp in Principles of Biomedical Ethics (1978) identify beneficence as one of the core values of healthcare ethics. Some scholars, such as Edmund Pellegrino, argue that beneficence is the only fundamental principle of medical ethics. They argue that healing should be the sole purpose of medicine, and that endeavors like cosmetic surgery and euthanasia are severely unethical and against the Hippocratic Oath.

Non-maleficence

The concept of non-maleficence is embodied by the phrase, "first, do no harm," or the Latin, primum non nocere. Many consider that should be the main or primary consideration (hence primum): that it is more important not to harm your patient, than to do them good, which is part of the Hippocratic oath that doctors take. This is partly because enthusiastic practitioners are prone to using treatments that they believe will do good, without first having evaluated them adequately to ensure they do no harm to the patient. Much harm has been done to patients as a result, as in the saying, "The treatment was a success, but the patient died." It is not only more important to do no harm than to do good; it is also important to know how likely it is that your treatment will harm a patient. So a physician should go further than not prescribing medications they know to be harmful—he or she should not prescribe medications (or otherwise treat the patient) unless s/he knows that the treatment is unlikely to be harmful; or at the very least, that patient understands the risks and benefits, and that the likely benefits outweigh the likely risks.

In practice, however, many treatments carry some risk of harm. In some circumstances, e.g. in desperate situations where the outcome without treatment will be grave, risky treatments that stand a high chance of harming the patient will be justified, as the risk of not treating is also very likely to do harm. So the principle of non-maleficence is not absolute, and balances against the principle of beneficence (doing good), as the effects of the two principles together often give rise to a double effect (further described in next section). Even basic actions like taking a blood sample or an injection of a drug cause harm to the patient's body. Euthanasia also goes against the principle of beneficence because the patient dies as a result of the medical treatment by the doctor.

Double effect

Double effect refers to two types of consequences that may be produced by a single action, and in medical ethics it is usually regarded as the combined effect of beneficence and non-maleficence.

A commonly cited example of this phenomenon is the use of morphine or other analgesic in the dying patient. Such use of morphine can have the beneficial effect of easing the pain and suffering of the patient while simultaneously having the maleficent effect of shortening the life of the patient through the deactivation of the respiratory system.

Respect for human rights

The human rights era started with the formation of the United Nations in 1945, which was charged with the promotion of human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) was the first major document to define human rights. Medical doctors have an ethical duty to protect the human rights and human dignity of the patient so the advent of a document that defines human rights has had its effect on medical ethics. Most codes of medical ethics now require respect for the human rights of the patient.

The Council of Europe promotes the rule of law and observance of human rights in Europe. The Council of Europe adopted the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (1997) to create a uniform code of medical ethics for its 47 member-states. The Convention applies international human rights law to medical ethics. It provides special protection of physical integrity for those who are unable to consent, which includes children.

No organ or tissue removal may be carried out on a person who does not have the capacity to consent under Article 5.

As of December 2013, the convention had been ratified or acceded to by twenty-nine member-states of the Council of Europe.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) also promotes the protection of human rights and human dignity. According to UNESCO, "Declarations are another means of defining norms, which are not subject to ratification. Like recommendations, they set forth universal principles to which the community of States wished to attribute the greatest possible authority and to afford the broadest possible support." UNESCO adopted the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and Biomedicine (2005) to advance the application of international human rights law in medical ethics. The Declaration provides special protection of human rights for incompetent persons.

In applying and advancing scientific knowledge, medical practice and associated technologies, human vulnerability should be taken into account. Individuals and groups of special vulnerability should be protected and the personal integrity of such individuals respected.

Solidarity

Individualistic standards of autonomy and personal human rights as they relate to social justice seen in the Anglo-Saxon community, clash with and can also supplement the concept of solidarity, which stands closer to a European healthcare perspective focused on community, universal welfare, and the unselfish wish to provide healthcare equally for all. In the United States individualistic and self-interested healthcare norms are upheld, whereas in other countries, including European countries, a sense of respect for the community and personal support is more greatly upheld in relation to free healthcare.

Acceptance of ambiguity in medicine

Ethical prayer for medical wisdom by Dr Edmond Fernandes

The concept of normality, that there is a human physiological standard contrasting with conditions of illness, abnormality and pain, leads to assumptions and bias that negatively affects health care practice. It is important to realize that normality is ambiguous and that ambiguity in healthcare and the acceptance of such ambiguity is necessary in order to practice humbler medicine and understand complex, sometimes unusual usual medical cases. Thus, society's views on central concepts in philosophy and clinical beneficence must be questioned and revisited, adopting ambiguity as a central player in medical practice.

Conflicts

Between beneficence and non-maleficence

Beneficence can come into conflict with non-maleficence when healthcare professionals are deciding between a “first, do no harm” approach vs. a “first, do good” approach, such as when deciding whether or not to operate when the balance between the risk and benefit of the operation is not known and must be estimated. Healthcare professionals who place beneficence below other principles like non-maleficence may decide not to help a patient more than a limited amount if they feel they have met the standard of care and are not morally obligated to provide additional services. Young and Wagner argued that, in general, beneficence takes priority over non-maleficence (“first, do good,” not “first, do no harm”), both historically and philosophically.

Between autonomy and beneficence/non-maleficence

Autonomy can come into conflict with beneficence when patients disagree with recommendations that healthcare professionals believe are in the patient's best interest. When the patient's interests conflict with the patient's welfare, different societies settle the conflict in a wide range of manners. In general, Western medicine defers to the wishes of a mentally competent patient to make their own decisions, even in cases where the medical team believes that they are not acting in their own best interests. However, many other societies prioritize beneficence over autonomy. People deemed to not be mentally competent or having a mental disorder may be treated involuntarily.

Examples include when a patient does not want treatment because of, for example, religious or cultural views. In the case of euthanasia, the patient, or relatives of a patient, may want to end the life of the patient. Also, the patient may want an unnecessary treatment, as can be the case in hypochondria or with cosmetic surgery; here, the practitioner may be required to balance the desires of the patient for medically unnecessary potential risks against the patient's informed autonomy in the issue. A doctor may want to prefer autonomy because refusal to respect the patient's self-determination would harm the doctor-patient relationship.

Organ donations can sometimes pose interesting scenarios, in which a patient is classified as a non-heart beating donor (NHBD), where life support fails to restore the heartbeat and is now considered futile but brain death has not occurred. Classifying a patient as a NHBD can qualify someone to be subject to non-therapeutic intensive care, in which treatment is only given to preserve the organs that will be donated and not to preserve the life of the donor. This can bring up ethical issues as some may see respect for the donors wishes to donate their healthy organs as respect for autonomy, while others may view the sustaining of futile treatment during vegetative state maleficence for the patient and the patient's family. Some are worried making this process a worldwide customary measure may dehumanize and take away from the natural process of dying and what it brings along with it.

Individuals' capacity for informed decision-making may come into question during resolution of conflicts between autonomy and beneficence. The role of surrogate medical decision-makers is an extension of the principle of autonomy.

On the other hand, autonomy and beneficence/non-maleficence may also overlap. For example, a breach of patients' autonomy may cause decreased confidence for medical services in the population and subsequently less willingness to seek help, which in turn may cause inability to perform beneficence.

The principles of autonomy and beneficence/non-maleficence may also be expanded to include effects on the relatives of patients or even the medical practitioners, the overall population and economic issues when making medical decisions.

Euthanasia

There is disagreement among American physicians as to whether the non-maleficence principle excludes the practice of euthanasia. Euthanasia is currently legal in the states of Washington, DC, California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. Around the world, there are different organizations that campaign to change legislation about the issue of physician-assisted death, or PAD. Examples of such organizations are the Hemlock Society of the United States and the Dignity in Dying campaign in the United Kingdom. These groups believe that doctors should be given the right to end a patient's life only if the patient is conscious enough to decide for themselves, is knowledgeable about the possibility of alternative care, and has willingly asked to end their life or requested access to the means to do so.

This argument is disputed in other parts of the world. For example, in the state of Louisiana, giving advice or supplying the means to end a person's life is considered a criminal act and can be charged as a felony. In state courts, this crime is comparable to manslaughter. The same laws apply in the states of Mississippi and Nebraska.

Informed consent refers to a patient's right to receive information relevant to a recommended treatment, in order to be able to make a well-considered, voluntary decision about their care. To give informed consent, a patient must be competent to make a decision regarding their treatment and be presented with relevant information regarding a treatment recommendation, including its nature and purpose, and the burdens, risks and potential benefits of all options and alternatives. After receiving and understanding this information, the patient can then make a fully informed decision to either consent or refuse treatment. In certain circumstances, there can be an exception to the need for informed consent, including, but not limited to, in cases of a medical emergency or patient incompetency. The ethical concept of informed consent also applies in a clinical research setting; all human participants in research must voluntarily decide to participate in the study after being fully informed of all relevant aspects of the research trial necessary to decide whether to participate or not. Informed consent is both an ethical and legal duty; if proper consent is not received prior to a procedure, treatment, or participation in research, providers can be held liable for battery and/or other torts. In the United States, informed consent is governed by both federal and state law, and the specific requirements for obtaining informed consent vary state to state.

Confidentiality

Confidentiality is commonly applied to conversations between doctors and patients. This concept is commonly known as patient-physician privilege. Legal protections prevent physicians from revealing their discussions with patients, even under oath in court.

Confidentiality is mandated in the United States by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 known as HIPAA, specifically the Privacy Rule, and various state laws, some more rigorous than HIPAA. However, numerous exceptions to the rules have been carved out over the years. For example, many states require physicians to report gunshot wounds to the police and impaired drivers to the Department of Motor Vehicles. Confidentiality is also challenged in cases involving the diagnosis of a sexually transmitted disease in a patient who refuses to reveal the diagnosis to a spouse, and in the termination of a pregnancy in an underage patient, without the knowledge of the patient's parents. Many states in the U.S. have laws governing parental notification in underage abortion. Those working in mental health have a duty to warn those who they deem to be at risk from their patients in some countries.

Traditionally, medical ethics has viewed the duty of confidentiality as a relatively non-negotiable tenet of medical practice. More recently, critics like Jacob Appel have argued for a more nuanced approach to the duty that acknowledges the need for flexibility in many cases.

Confidentiality is an important issue in primary care ethics, where physicians care for many patients from the same family and community, and where third parties often request information from the considerable medical database typically gathered in primary health care.

Privacy and the Internet

In increasing frequency, medical researchers are researching activities in online environments such as discussion boards and bulletin boards, and there is concern that the requirements of informed consent and privacy are not applied, although some guidelines do exist.

One issue that has arisen, however, is the disclosure of information. While researchers wish to quote from the original source in order to argue a point, this can have repercussions when the identity of the patient is not kept confidential. The quotations and other information about the site can be used to identify the patient, and researchers have reported cases where members of the site, bloggers and others have used this information as 'clues' in a game in an attempt to identify the site. Some researchers have employed various methods of "heavy disguise." including discussing a different condition from that under study.

Healthcare institutions' websites have the responsibility to ensure that the private medical records of their online visitors are secure from being marketed and monetized into the hands of drug companies, occupation records, and insurance companies. The delivery of diagnosis online leads patients to believe that doctors in some parts of the country are at the direct service of drug companies, finding diagnosis as convenient as what drug still has patent rights on it. Physicians and drug companies are found to be competing for top ten search engine ranks to lower costs of selling these drugs with little to no patient involvement.

With the expansion of internet healthcare platforms, online practitioner legitimacy and privacy accountability face unique challenges such as e-paparazzi, online information brokers, industrial spies, unlicensed information providers that work outside of traditional medical codes for profit. The American Medical Association (AMA) states that medical websites have the responsibility to ensure the health care privacy of online visitors and protect patient records from being marketed and monetized into the hands of insurance companies, employers, and marketers.  With the rapid unification of healthcare, business practices, computer science and e-commerce to create these online diagnostic websites, efforts to maintain health care system's ethical confidentiality standard need to keep up as well. Over the next few years, the Department of Health and Human Services has stated that they will be working towards lawfully protecting the online privacy and digital transfers of patient Electronic Medical Records (EMR) under The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Looking forward, strong governance and accountability mechanisms will need to be considered with respect to digital health ecosystems, including potential metaverse healthcare platforms, to ensure the highest ethical standards are upheld relating to medical confidentiality and patient data.

Control, resolution and enforcement

In the UK, medical ethics forms part of the training of physicians and surgeons and disregard for ethical principles can result in doctors barred from medical practice after a decision by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service.

To ensure that appropriate ethical values are being applied within hospitals, effective hospital accreditation requires that ethical considerations are taken into account, for example with respect to physician integrity, conflict of interest, research ethics and organ transplantation ethics.

Guidelines

There is much documentation of the history and necessity of the Declaration of Helsinki. The first code of conduct for research including medical ethics was the Nuremberg Code. This document had large ties to Nazi war crimes, as it was introduced in 1997, so it didn't make much of a difference in terms of regulating practice. This issue called for the creation of the Declaration. There are some stark differences between the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki, including the way it is written. Nuremberg was written in a very concise manner, with a simple explanation. The Declaration of Helsinki is written with a thorough explanation in mind and including many specific commentaries.

In the United Kingdom, General Medical Council provides clear overall modern guidance in the form of its 'Good Medical Practice' statement. Other organizations, such as the Medical Protection Society and a number of university departments, are often consulted by British doctors regarding issues relating to ethics.

Ethics committees

Often, simple communication is not enough to resolve a conflict, and a hospital ethics committee must convene to decide a complex matter.

These bodies are composed primarily of healthcare professionals, but may also include philosophers, lay people, and clergy – indeed, in many parts of the world their presence is considered mandatory in order to provide balance.

With respect to the expected composition of such bodies in the US, Europe and Australia, the following applies.

U.S. recommendations suggest that Research and Ethical Boards (REBs) should have five or more members, including at least one scientist, one non-scientist, and one person not affiliated with the institution. The REB should include people knowledgeable in the law and standards of practice and professional conduct. Special memberships are advocated for handicapped or disabled concerns, if required by the protocol under review.

The European Forum for Good Clinical Practice (EFGCP) suggests that REBs include two practicing physicians who share experience in biomedical research and are independent from the institution where the research is conducted; one lay person; one lawyer; and one paramedical professional, e.g. nurse or pharmacist. They recommend that a quorum include both sexes from a wide age range and reflect the cultural make-up of the local community.

The 1996 Australian Health Ethics Committee recommendations were entitled, "Membership Generally of Institutional Ethics Committees". They suggest a chairperson be preferably someone not employed or otherwise connected with the institution. Members should include a person with knowledge and experience in professional care, counseling or treatment of humans; a minister of religion or equivalent, e.g. Aboriginal elder; a layman; a laywoman; a lawyer and, in the case of a hospital-based ethics committee, a nurse.

The assignment of philosophers or religious clerics will reflect the importance attached by the society to the basic values involved. An example from Sweden with Torbjörn Tännsjö on a couple of such committees indicates secular trends gaining influence.

Cultural concerns

Cultural differences can create difficult medical ethics problems. Some cultures have spiritual or magical theories about the origins and cause of disease, for example, and reconciling these beliefs with the tenets of Western medicine can be very difficult. As different cultures continue to intermingle and more cultures live alongside each other, the healthcare system, which tends to deal with important life events such as birth, death and suffering, increasingly experiences difficult dilemmas that can sometimes lead to cultural clashes and conflict. Efforts to respond in a culturally sensitive manner go hand in hand with a need to distinguish limits to cultural tolerance.

Culture and language

As more people from different cultural and religious backgrounds move to other countries, among these, the United States, it is becoming increasingly important to be culturally sensitive to all communities in order to provide the best health care for all people. Lack of cultural knowledge can lead to misunderstandings and even inadequate care, which can lead to ethical problems. A common complaint patients have is feeling like they are not being heard, or perhaps, understood. Preventing escalating conflict can be accomplished by seeking interpreters, noticing body language and tone of both yourself and the patient as well as attempting to understand the patient's perspective in order to reach an acceptable option.

Some believe most medical practitioners in the future will have to be or greatly benefit from being bilingual. In addition to knowing the language, truly understanding culture is best for optimal care. Recently, a practice called 'narrative medicine' has gained some interest as it has a potential for improving patient-physician communication and understanding of patient's perspective. Interpreting a patient's stories or day-to-day activities as opposed to standardizing and collecting patient data may help in acquiring a better sense of what each patient needs, individually, with respect to their illness. Without this background information, many physicians are unable to properly understand the cultural differences that may set two different patients apart, and thus, may diagnose or recommend treatments that are culturally insensitive or inappropriate. In short, patient narrative has the potential for uncovering patient information and preferences that may otherwise be overlooked.

Medical humanitarianism

In order to address the underserved, uneducated communities in need of nutrition, housing, and healthcare disparities seen in much of the world today, some argue that we must fall back on ethical values in order to create a foundation to move towards a reasonable understanding, which encourages commitment and motivation to improve factors causing premature death as a goal in a global community. Such factors – such as poverty, environment and education – are said to be out of national or individual control and so this commitment is by default a social and communal responsibility placed on global communities that are able to aid others in need. This is based on the framework of 'provincial globalism,' which seeks a world in which all people have the capability to be healthy.

One concern regarding the intersection of medical ethics and humanitarian medical aid is how medical assistance can be as harmful as it is helpful to the community being served. One such example being how political forces may control how foreign humanitarian aid can be utilized in the region it is meant to be provided in. This would be congruous in situations where political strife could lead such aid being used in favor of one group over another. Another example of how foreign humanitarian aid can be misused in its intended community includes the possibility of dissonance forming between a foreign humanitarian aid group and the community being served. Examples of this could include the relationships being viewed between aid workers, style of dress, or the lack of education regarding local culture and customs.

Humanitarian practices in areas lacking optimum care can also pause other interesting and difficult ethical dilemmas in terms of beneficence and non-maleficence. Humanitarian practices are based upon providing better medical equipment and care for communities whose country does not provide adequate healthcare. The issues with providing healthcare to communities in need may sometimes be religious or cultural backgrounds keeping people from performing certain procedures or taking certain drugs. On the other hand, wanting certain procedures done in a specific manner due to religious or cultural belief systems may also occur. The ethical dilemma stems from differences in culture between communities helping those with medical disparities and the societies receiving aid. Women's rights, informed consent and education about health become controversial, as some treatments needed are against societal law, while some cultural traditions involve procedures against humanitarian efforts. Examples of this are female genital mutilation (FGM), aiding in reinfibulation, providing sterile equipment in order to perform procedures such as FGM, as well as informing patients of their HIV positive testing. The latter is controversial because certain communities have in the past outcast or killed HIV positive individuals.

Healthcare reform and lifestyle

Leading causes of death in the United States and around the world are highly related to behavioral consequences over genetic or environmental factors. This leads some to believe true healthcare reform begins with cultural reform, habit and overall lifestyle. Lifestyle, then, becomes the cause of many illnesses and the illnesses themselves are the result or side-effect of a larger problem. Some people believe this to be true and think that cultural change is needed in order for developing societies to cope and dodge the negative effects of drugs, food and conventional modes of transportation available to them. In 1990, tobacco use, diet, and exercise alone accounted for close to 80 percent of all premature deaths and continue to lead in this way through the 21st century. Heart disease, stroke, dementia, and diabetes are some of the diseases that may be affected by habit-forming patterns throughout our life. Some believe that medical lifestyle counseling and building healthy habits around our daily lives is one way to tackle health care reform.

Other cultures and healthcare

Buddhist medicine

Buddhist ethics and medicine are based on religious teachings of compassion and understanding of suffering and cause and effect and the idea that there is no beginning or end to life, but that instead there are only rebirths in an endless cycle. In this way, death is merely a phase in an indefinitely lengthy process of life, not an end. However, Buddhist teachings support living one's life to the fullest so that through all the suffering which encompasses a large part of what is life, there are no regrets. Buddhism accepts suffering as an inescapable experience, but values happiness and thus values life. Because of this, suicide and euthanasia, are prohibited. However, attempts to rid oneself of any physical or mental pain and suffering are seen as good acts. On the other hand, sedatives and drugs are thought to impair consciousness and awareness in the dying process, which is believed to be of great importance, as it is thought that one's dying consciousness remains and affects new life. Because of this, analgesics must not be part of the dying process, in order for the dying person to be present entirely and pass on their consciousness wholesomely. This can pose significant conflicts during end of life care in Western medical practice.

Taoist symbol of Yin and Yang

Chinese medicine

In traditional Chinese philosophy, human life is believed to be connected to nature, which is thought of as the foundation and encompassing force sustaining all of life's phases. Passing and coming of the seasons, life, birth and death are perceived as a cyclic and perpetual occurrences that are believed to be regulated by the principles of yin and yang. When one dies, the life-giving material force referred to as ch'i, encompassing both body and spirit, rejoins the material force of the universe and cycles on with respect to the rhythms set forth by yin and yang.

Because many Chinese people believe that circulation of both physical and 'psychic energy' is important to stay healthy, procedures which require surgery, as well as donations and transplantations of organs, are seen as a loss of ch'i, resulting in the loss of someone's vital energy supporting their consciousness and purpose in their lives. Furthermore, a person is never seen as a single unit but rather as a source of relationship, interconnected in a social web. Thus, it is believed that what makes a human one of us is relatedness and communication and family is seen as the basic unit of a community. This can greatly affect the way medical decisions are made among family members, as diagnoses are not always expected to be announced to the dying or sick, the elderly are expected to be cared for and represented by their children and physicians are expected to act in a paternalistic way. In short, informed consent as well as patient privacy can be difficult to enforce when dealing with Confucian families.

Furthermore, some Chinese people may be inclined to continue futile treatment in order to extend life and allow for fulfillment of the practice of benevolence and humanity. In contrast, patients with strong Daoist beliefs may see death as an obstacle and dying as a reunion with nature that should be accepted, and are therefore less likely to ask for treatment of an irreversible condition.

Islamic culture and medicine

Some believe Islamic medical ethics and framework remain poorly understood by many working in healthcare. It is important to recognize that for people of Islamic faith, Islam envelops and affects all aspects of life, not just medicine. Because many believe it is faith and a supreme deity that hold the cure to illness, it is common that the physician is viewed merely as help or intermediary player during the process of healing or medical care.

In addition to Chinese culture's emphasis on family as the basic unit of a community intertwined and forming a greater social construct, Islamic traditional medicine also places importance on the values of family and the well-being of a community. Many Islamic communities uphold paternalism as an acceptable part of medical care. However, autonomy and self-rule is also valued and protected and, in Islamic medicine, it is particularly upheld in terms of providing and expecting privacy in the healthcare setting. An example of this is requesting same gender providers in order to retain modesty. Overall, Beauchamp's principles of beneficence, non-maleficence and justice are promoted and upheld in the medical sphere with as much importance as in Western culture. In contrast, autonomy is important but more nuanced. Furthermore, Islam also brings forth the principles of jurisprudence, Islamic law and legal maxims, which also allow for Islam to adapt to an ever-changing medical ethics framework.

Conflicts of interest

"More Doctors Smoke Camels than Any Other Cigarette" advertisement for Camel cigarettes in the 1940s

Physicians should not allow a conflict of interest to influence medical judgment. In some cases, conflicts are hard to avoid, and doctors have a responsibility to avoid entering such situations. Research has shown that conflicts of interests are very common among both academic physicians and physicians in practice.

Referral

Doctors who receive income from referring patients for medical tests have been shown to refer more patients for medical tests. This practice is proscribed by the American College of Physicians Ethics Manual. Fee splitting and the payments of commissions to attract referrals of patients is considered unethical and unacceptable in most parts of the world.

Vendor relationships

Studies show that doctors can be influenced by drug company inducements, including gifts and food. Industry-sponsored Continuing Medical Education (CME) programs influence prescribing patterns. Many patients surveyed in one study agreed that physician gifts from drug companies influence prescribing practices. A growing movement among physicians is attempting to diminish the influence of pharmaceutical industry marketing upon medical practice, as evidenced by Stanford University's ban on drug company-sponsored lunches and gifts. Other academic institutions that have banned pharmaceutical industry-sponsored gifts and food include the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, University of Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, and Yale University.

Treatment of family members

The American Medical Association (AMA) states that "Physicians generally should not treat themselves or members of their immediate family". This code seeks to protect patients and physicians because professional objectivity can be compromised when the physician is treating a loved one. Studies from multiple health organizations have illustrated that physician-family member relationships may cause an increase in diagnostic testing and costs. Many doctors still treat their family members. Doctors who do so must be vigilant not to create conflicts of interest or treat inappropriately. Physicians that treat family members need to be conscious of conflicting expectations and dilemmas when treating relatives, as established medical ethical principles may not be morally imperative when family members are confronted with serious illness.

Sexual relationships

Sexual relationships between doctors and patients can create ethical conflicts, since sexual consent may conflict with the fiduciary responsibility of the physician. Out of the many disciplines in current medicine, there are studies that have been conducted in order to ascertain the occurrence of Doctor-Patient sexual misconduct. Results from those studies appear to indicate that certain disciplines are more likely to be offenders than others. Psychiatrists and obstetrician-gynecologists, for example, are two disciplines noted for having a higher rate of sexual misconduct. The violation of ethical conduct between doctors and patients also has an association with the age and sex of doctor and patient. Male physicians aged 40–59 years have been found to be more likely to have been reported for sexual misconduct; women aged 20–39 have been found to make up a significant portion of reported victims of sexual misconduct. Doctors who enter into sexual relationships with patients face the threats of losing their medical license and prosecution. In the early 1990s, it was estimated that 2–9% of doctors had violated this rule. Sexual relationships between physicians and patients' relatives may also be prohibited in some jurisdictions, although this prohibition is highly controversial.

Futility

In some hospitals, medical futility is referred to as treatment that is unable to benefit the patient. An important part of practicing good medical ethics is by attempting to avoid futility by practicing non-maleficence. What should be done if there is no chance that a patient will survive or benefit from a potential treatment but the family members insist on advanced care? Previously, some articles defined futility as the patient having less than a one percent chance of surviving. Some of these cases are examined in court.

Advance directives include living wills and durable powers of attorney for health care. (See also Do Not Resuscitate and cardiopulmonary resuscitation) In many cases, the "expressed wishes" of the patient are documented in these directives, and this provides a framework to guide family members and health care professionals in the decision-making process when the patient is incapacitated. Undocumented expressed wishes can also help guide decisions in the absence of advance directives, as in the Quinlan case in Missouri.

"Substituted judgment" is the concept that a family member can give consent for treatment if the patient is unable (or unwilling) to give consent themselves. The key question for the decision-making surrogate is not, "What would you like to do?", but instead, "What do you think the patient would want in this situation?".

Courts have supported family's arbitrary definitions of futility to include simple biological survival, as in the Baby K case (in which the courts ordered a child born with only a brain stem instead of a complete brain to be kept on a ventilator based on the religious belief that all life must be preserved).

Baby Doe Law establishes state protection for a disabled child's right to life, ensuring that this right is protected even over the wishes of parents or guardians in cases where they want to withhold treatment.

Global catastrophic risk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_catastrophic_risk A global catastrophic risk or a ...