Search

As social and interdependent beings, we have responsibilities to each other. One of them is to recognize each other appropriately. When we fail to meet this responsibility, we often stigmatize. In this paper, I argue that the COVID‐19‐related stigmatization is a variation of the lack of recognition understood as an orientation to our evaluative features. Various stereotypical behaviors regarding COVID‐19 become stigmatized practices because of labeling, stereotyping, separation, status loss and discrimination, and power. When people stigmatize COVID‐19 victims, they orient themselves to their evaluative quality of being vulnerable to the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus by internalizing the victims as dangerous, understanding them as separable, and being motivated to act with them differently. All this causes the COVID‐19 victims to lose status and suffer discrimination for which they do not experience participatory parity in different facets of their lives, rendering the COVID‐19‐related stigmatization an appalling example of misrecognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Informed consent to medical intervention is fundamental in both ethics and law. But in practice it is often not taken seriously in developing countries. This paper provides an appraisal of informed consent practices in Bangladesh. Following a review of the ethical and legal principles of informed consent, it assesses the degree to which doctors adhere to it in Bangladesh. Based on findings of non‐compliance, it then investigates the reasons for such non‐compliance through an appraisal of informed consent practices in Bangladesh and provides recommendations aimed at improving such practices. The significance of this paper lies in unveiling the interdependence between the ethical and legal traits of informed consent and their ramifications on strengthening the patient‐oriented approach of duty to care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]