» Articles » PMID: 33294029

Patient Isolation During Infectious Disease Outbreaks: Arguments for Physical Family Presence

Overview
Specialty Public Health
Date 2020 Dec 9
PMID 33294029
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This article argues that outbreak preparedness and response should implement a 'family presence' policy for infected patients in isolation that includes the option of physical visits and care within the isolation facility under some conditions. While such a 'physical family presence' (PFP) policy could increase infections during an outbreak and may raise moral dilemmas, we argue that it is ethically justified based on the least infringement principle and the need to minimize the harms and burdens of isolation as a restrictive measure. Categorical prohibition of PFP during the course of an outbreak or epidemic is likely to result in unnecessary harms to patients and families, and violate values such as the moral commitments of families to care for each other. Supporting the option of PFP under particular circumstances, on the other hand, will least infringe these moral considerations. An additional reason for a family presence policy is that it may facilitate voluntary cooperation with isolation and other restrictive measures. We provide an analysis of these considerations for supporting modes of family presence during an outbreak emergency, before defending the riskier option of PFP in the isolation facility from plausible objections and concerns.

Citing Articles

Companion restrictions in the emergency department during COVID-19: physician perceptions from the Western Cape, South Africa.

Wiebe L, Alvesson H, Stassen W BMJ Open. 2023; 13(5):e070982.

PMID: 37147101 PMC: 10163331. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070982.


Restricted family presence for hospitalized surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: How hospital care providers and families navigated ethical tensions and experiences of institutional betrayal.

Gotlib Conn L, Coburn N, Prospero L, Hallet J, Legere L, MacCharles T SSM Qual Res Health. 2022; 2:100147.

PMID: 35937964 PMC: 9344808. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2022.100147.

References
1.
Devi S . FRONTLINE: a new treatment facility for Ebola virus disease. Lancet. 2018; 392(10163):2428. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33118-0. View

2.
Kuo D, Houtrow A, Arango P, Kuhlthau K, Simmons J, Neff J . Family-centered care: current applications and future directions in pediatric health care. Matern Child Health J. 2011; 16(2):297-305. PMC: 3262132. DOI: 10.1007/s10995-011-0751-7. View

3.
Mak I, Chu C, Pan P, Yiu M, Chan V . Long-term psychiatric morbidities among SARS survivors. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2009; 31(4):318-26. PMC: 7112501. DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2009.03.001. View

4.
Coltart C, Lindsey B, Ghinai I, Johnson A, Heymann D . The Ebola outbreak, 2013-2016: old lessons for new epidemics. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2017; 372(1721). PMC: 5394636. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0297. View

5.
Giubilini A, Douglas T, Maslen H, Savulescu J . Quarantine, isolation and the duty of easy rescue in public health. Dev World Bioeth. 2017; 18(2):182-189. PMC: 6001516. DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12165. View