14.4 Ethical decision-making frameworks for campaign planners

Health campaigns require careful ethical consideration. Various frameworks guide decision-making, each with unique strengths and limitations. Consequentialism focuses on outcomes, deontology on moral rules, and virtue ethics on character. Principlism balances key principles, while the ethics of care emphasizes relationships.

Applying these frameworks to real-world scenarios helps campaign planners navigate complex ethical dilemmas. By understanding and integrating multiple approaches, health communicators can develop personal ethical frameworks. This enables them to make more thoughtful, balanced decisions that respect individual rights while promoting public health.

Ethical Decision-Making Frameworks for Health Campaign Planning

Ethical frameworks for campaigns

Top images from around the web for Ethical frameworks for campaigns

• 

  Frontiers | Principlism and Personalism. Comparing Two Ethical Models Applied Clinically in ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Ethical Dimensions of Public Health Actions and Policies With Special Focus on COVID-19 View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Whom Should Be Saved? A Proposed Ethical Framework for Allocating Scarce Medical ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Principlism and Personalism. Comparing Two Ethical Models Applied Clinically in ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Ethical Dimensions of Public Health Actions and Policies With Special Focus on COVID-19 View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Ethical frameworks for campaigns

• 

  Frontiers | Principlism and Personalism. Comparing Two Ethical Models Applied Clinically in ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Ethical Dimensions of Public Health Actions and Policies With Special Focus on COVID-19 View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Whom Should Be Saved? A Proposed Ethical Framework for Allocating Scarce Medical ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Principlism and Personalism. Comparing Two Ethical Models Applied Clinically in ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Ethical Dimensions of Public Health Actions and Policies With Special Focus on COVID-19 View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Consequentialism evaluates the morality of actions based on their outcomes or consequences
  • Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism that aims to maximize overall utility or well-being for the greatest number of people (greatest good for the greatest number)
• Deontology judges the morality of actions based on adherence to moral rules and duties, regardless of the consequences that may result
  • Kant's Categorical Imperative states that one should act only according to principles that could become universal laws applicable to everyone
• Virtue Ethics emphasizes the importance of cultivating moral character and virtues, such as compassion, integrity, and courage, in order to make ethical decisions
  • Aristotle's Golden Mean suggests that moral decision-making should seek balance and moderation between extremes (courage as a mean between cowardice and recklessness)
• Principlism applies four key principles when making ethical decisions: respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence (do no harm), beneficence (do good), and justice (fair distribution of benefits and burdens)
  • These principles are balanced and prioritized when they come into conflict in a given situation (respecting autonomy while promoting public health)
• Ethics of Care highlights the significance of relationships, empathy, and context in moral decision-making
  • It considers the unique needs, vulnerabilities, and perspectives of individuals and communities affected by decisions (cultural sensitivity in health interventions)

Application to real-world scenarios

• Case Study 1: Promoting a controversial health intervention
  • Consequentialism would weigh the potential benefits (reduced disease burden) and harms (side effects, public backlash) to the target population and society as a whole
  • Deontology would consider the duties to respect individual autonomy (informed consent) and provide accurate, unbiased information about the intervention
• Case Study 2: Addressing health disparities in marginalized communities
  • Virtue Ethics would emphasize cultivating virtues such as compassion, cultural sensitivity, and commitment to social justice in campaign planners and implementers
  • Ethics of Care would prioritize building trust, understanding the unique needs and perspectives of the community, and fostering empowering partnerships
• Case Study 3: Balancing individual rights and public health goals
  • Principlism would seek to balance respect for individual autonomy (right to refuse vaccination) with nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice (protecting population health)
  • Consequentialism would consider the broader impact on population health outcomes, health equity, and social stability of different policy options

Strengths vs limitations of approaches

• Consequentialism
  • Strengths: Focuses on the actual outcomes and impact of actions, aiming to maximize overall well-being and minimize harm
  • Limitations: Difficulty in predicting and quantifying consequences, potential neglect of individual rights and duties
• Deontology
  • Strengths: Provides clear, universal rules for moral conduct, emphasizing the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions
  • Limitations: Inflexibility in complex, context-dependent situations, potential conflicts between competing duties
• Virtue Ethics
  • Strengths: Emphasizes the importance of character development and context-sensitive, situational judgment in ethical decision-making
  • Limitations: Lack of clear action-guidance, potential for subjective interpretations of virtues and their application
• Principlism
  • Strengths: Offers a structured approach to balancing and prioritizing competing moral principles in a given situation
  • Limitations: Challenges in weighing and specifying principles in practice, potential for conflicting interpretations
• Ethics of Care
  • Strengths: Recognizes the centrality of relationships, empathy, and attention to contextual factors in moral deliberation
  • Limitations: Potential for bias and partiality, difficulty in applying to large-scale, impersonal health campaigns

Personal ethical framework development

• Identify core values and principles to guide decision-making
  • Respect for persons: Upholding autonomy, dignity, and informed consent of individuals
  • Beneficence: Promoting the well-being and flourishing of individuals and communities served
  • Justice: Ensuring fairness, equity, and non-discrimination in the distribution of benefits and burdens
• Integrate insights and perspectives from multiple ethical frameworks
  • Consequentialism: Consider the outcomes, impact, and unintended consequences of campaign decisions
  • Deontology: Adhere to fundamental moral duties and obligations (truth-telling, promise-keeping)
  • Virtue Ethics: Cultivate moral character traits and context-sensitive, practical wisdom in decision-making
• Engage in reflective practice and continuous learning
  • Critically examine assumptions, biases, and power dynamics in campaign planning and implementation
  • Seek out diverse perspectives and collaborate with stakeholders, especially those most affected
  • Continuously evaluate, refine, and adapt the personal ethical framework based on experience, feedback, and new insights