COVID-19 y bioética global

Contenido principal del artículo

Henk ten Have


El fenómeno global de la pandemia ha reactivado la noción de bioética global, argumentando que la bioética convencional no aborda suficientemente la experiencia pandémica. Esta experiencia pone de relieve la conectividad, la vulnerabilidad diferencial, lo inesperado y la falta de preparación. Durante la pandemia, las preocupaciones éticas se enfocan de una manera específica. Este artículo examina tres formas de enmarcarlas: con las nociones de excepcionalidad, controlabilidad y binaridad. A continuación se analiza el marco de la bioética global, que ofrece una perspectiva más amplia e inclusiva de la experiencia de la pandemia. Una noción fundamental en este marco es la relacionalidad. También acentúa que los intereses individuales y comunes no se oponen. Una tercera consideración en esta perspectiva es la solidaridad. Un marco global de bioética es un incentivo para repensar la globalización, la gobernanza global, la salud pública y la asistencia sanitaria. Si la bioética como esfuerzo social y global moviliza la imaginación moral para ampliar el alcance de la preocupación moral aplicando la capacidad humana de empatizar, contribuye de forma crucial a mejorar la vida social y la civilización.


Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

PLUMX Metrics

Detalles del artículo

Cómo citar
ten Have, H. (2022). COVID-19 y bioética global. Medicina Y Ética, 33(1), 19–83.


Ho A, Dascalu I. Global disparity and solidarity in a pandemic. Hastings Center Report. 2020; 50(3): 65-67.

Fins JJ. Covid-19 makes clear that bioethics must confront health disparities. The Hastings Center. 9 de julio de 2020.

Venkatapuram S. Covid-19 and the global ethics freefall. The Hastings Center. 19 de marzo de 2020.

Cohen J. Individual freedom or public health? A false choice in the Covid era. The Hastings Center. 9 de junio de 2020.

Lewis J, Schuklenk U. Bioethics met its Covid-19 Waterloo: The doctor knows best again. Bioethics. 2021; 35: 3-5.

Chadwick R. Covid-19 and the possibility of solidarity. Bioethics. 2020; 34(7): 637.

Klugman C. The cult of autonomy and why bioethics needs to become more communal. Bioethics. Net. 24 de septiembre de 2020.

Wolf SM. What has Covid-19 exposed in Bioethics? Four Myths. Hastings Cen- ter Report. 2021; 51(3): 3-4.

Ravitsky V. Post-Covid bioethics. The Hastings Center. 20 de mayo de 2020.

Gostin LO, Moon S, Meier BM. Reimagining global health governance in the age of Covid-19. American Journal of Public Health. 2020; 110(11): 1615-1619.

Chadwick R. Covid-19 and the possibility of solidarity. Bioethics. 2020; 34(7): 637.

Martins AA. Global bioethics in a pandemic: A dialogical approach. Health Care Ethics USA. 2021.

Heilinger J, Venkatapuram S, Voss M and Wild V. Bringing ethics into the global coronavirus response. The Hastings Center. 22 de junio de 2020.

Potter VR. Bioethics: Bridge to the future. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1971.

Ingold T. 2000. Globes and spheres. The topology of environmentalism. In In- gold T, editor. The perception of the environment. Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London and New York: Routledge. 2000; 209-218.

Cha I. The mundialization of home in the age of globalization. Towards a trans- cultural ethics. Mûnchen: LIT Verlag; 2012.

Hawkins D. Differential occupational risk for COVID19 and other infection expo- sure according to race and ethnicity. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2020; 63(9): 817-820.

Kiaghadi A, Rifai HS, Liaw W. Assessing COVID-19 risk, vulnerability and infec- tion prevalence in communities. PLoS ONE. 2020; 15(10): e0241166.

Cleveland Manchanda E, Couillard C, Sivashanker K. Inequity in crisis stan- dards of care. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020; 383(4): e16.

Horton R. The COVID-19 catastrophe. What’s gone wrong and how to stop it happening again. Cambridge: Polity, 2020.

Chik H, Baptista E. Chile COVID-19 vaccination drive adds to Sinovac efficacy data. South China Morning Post. 9 de abril de 2021.

WHO (World Health Organization). Malaria. Key facts, 2021.

WHO (World Health Organization). Tuberculosis. Key facts, 2020.

WHO (World Health Organization). Dengue and severe dengue. Geneva: WHO, 2020.

WHO (World Health Organization). Ten threats to global health in 2019.

Ryan F. Virusphere. Ebola, AIDS, influenza and the hidden world of the virus. London: William Collins, 2019.

Honigsbaum M. The pandemic century. One hundred years of panic, hysteria, and hubris. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2020.

Mackenzie D. WHO-19. The pandemic that never should have happened, and how to stop it. London: The Bridge Street Press, 2020.

Rosa H. The uncontrollability of the world. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2020.

Rosa H. The uncontrollability of the world. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2020.

Symons X. Should we sacrifice older people to save the economy? BioEdge. 28 de marzo de 2020.

Childs BH, Vearrier I. A journal of the COVID-19 (plague) year. HEC Forum. 2021; 33: 1-6.

Williams A. Intergenerational equity: An exploration of the ‘fair innings’ argu- ment. Health Economics. 1997; 6: 117-132.<117::AID-HEC256>3.0.CO;2-B

Fisher A. Fair innings? Against healthcare rationing in favour of the young over the elderly. Studies in Christian Ethics. 2013; 26(4): 431-450.

Bramstedt KA. Age-based health care allocation as a wedge separating the person from the patient and commodifying medicine. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology. 2001; 11: 185-188.

De Medeiros K. A COVID-19 side effect: Virulent resurgence of ageism. The Hastings Center. 14 de mayo de 2020.

Peisah C, Byrnes A, Doron I, Dark M, Quinn G. Advocacy for the human rights of older people in the COVID pandemic and beyond: a call to mental health profes- sionals. International Psychogeriatrics. 2020; 32(10):1199-1204.

Kuylen MNI, Kim SY, Keene AR, Owen GS. Should age matter in COVID-19 tria- ge? A deliberative study. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2021; 47: 291-295.

Marcel, G. Homo viator. Introduction to a metaphysic of hope. New York: Harper & Row, 1962.

Kaminsky C. 2020. Normality «ex post»: social conditions of moral responsibi- lity. In Woesler M, Sass HM, editors. Medicine and ethics in times of corona. Zürich: LIT Verlag. 2020; 63-74.

Mackenzie C, Stoljar N. Relational autonomy: feminist perspectives on auto- nomy, agency, and the social self. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Gintis H. Individuality and entanglement: The moral and materials bases of so- cial life. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2017.

WeCope (World Emergency COVID-19 Pandemic Ethics Committee). State- ment on individual autonomy and social responsibility within a public health emer- gency. In Woesler M, Sass HM, Editores. Medicine and ethics in times of corona. Zürich: LIT Verlag. 2020; 419-425.

Bieri P. Human dignity: A way of living. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2017.

Ten Have H. Global bioethics. An introduction. London and New York: Routledge; 2016.

WHO (World Health Organization). WHO Director-General’s statement on Tan- zania and COVID-19. 2021.

Eurasia Group. Ending the COVID-19 pandemic: The need for a global approach. November 25, 2020.

UNESCO. Statement on COVID-19: Ethical considerations from a global perspec- tive. Paris: UNESCO, 2020.

European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. Statement on European solidarity and the protection of fundamental rights in the Covid-19 pandemic. April 2, 2020.

Dawson A, Emanuel EJ, Parker M, Smith MJ and Voo TC. Key ethical con- cepts and their application to Covid-19 research. Public Health Ethics. 2020; 13(2): 127-132.

Pontifical Academy for Life. Vaccine for all. 20 points for a fairer and healthier world. 29 de diciembre de 2020.

Jennings B, Dawson A. Solidarity in the moral imagination of bioethics. Has- tings Center Report. 2015; 45(5): 31-38.

Brown G, Susskind D. International cooperation during the Covid-19 pande- mic. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 2020; 36(S1): S64-S76.

West-Oram PGN, Buyx A. Global health solidarity. Public Health Ethics. 2017; 10(2): 212-224.