Public health routinely operates at the intersection of individual rights and collective benefit. Vaccination mandates, quarantine orders, food regulation, taxation of harmful products - all raise ethical questions.

In this chapter, we examine how public health ethics differs from traditional medical ethics. While clinical ethics centres on the doctor–patient relationship and autonomy, public health ethics focuses on populations, equity, and social justice.

We explore foundational principles: beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, respect for persons, proportionality, least restrictive means, and procedural fairness. Public health interventions often affect individuals who have not consented - making justification, transparency, and evidence essential.

The chapter addresses recurring dilemmas: When is it legitimate to limit liberty? How should scarce resources be allocated? What obligations exist to protect vulnerable populations? How should competing goods be balanced?

Importantly, public health ethics emphasises fairness in both outcomes and processes. Legitimacy depends not only on results, but on how decisions are made.

Ethics in public health is not an abstract add-on. It is central to maintaining public trust and social cohesion.

Key Takeaways

* Public health ethics differs from clinical ethics in scope and focus.

* Interventions affecting liberty require strong justification.

* Proportionality and least restrictive means are guiding principles.

* Equity and social justice are core public health values.

* Transparency strengthens legitimacy.

* Resource allocation must balance efficiency and fairness.

* Public engagement enhances ethical decision-making.

* Ethical reasoning is essential in crisis response.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit drmanaankarray.substack.com/subscribe