Ethik und Corona: Normative Grenzen politischer Maßnahmen zur Eindämmung der
Covid-19-Pandemie
#MMPMIDC7649894
Schulze Heuling D
?-/-? 2021[]; 31
(3
): 417-39
PMIDC7649894
show ga
Around the globe, drastic measures have been implemented in order to contain the
Covid-19 pandemic. Ultimately, their justification is an ethical one: the duty to
save human lives. But while individual policies are intensely discussed, an
analysis of the discourse from a meta-perspective remains a desideratum. This
paper seeks to contribute to such an analysis. It shows that structurally, the
discussion is engaged in a risk-benefit-analysis. Within this analysis the fact
that the containment policy itself causes deaths is insufficiently taken into
account. In paralleling the current situation with the trolley problem and
a ruling of the German Constitutional Court concerning the Luftsicherheitsgesetz
(Aviation Security Act), the paper argues that the pandemic presents politicians
with the choice to either not prevent the death of some, or sacrifice the lives
of others in order to save them. As the latter is ethically dubious and
unconstitutional, some of the policies already implemented need to be
reevaluated. However, the argument does not imply that any action to mitigate the
effects of the Covid-19 pandemic is illegitimate. Thus, the paper closes by
examining the ethical conditions for political action in this case.
free
free
free
