The Tragic Choices During the Global Health Emergency: Comparative Economic Law Reflections

The health emergency sparked off by the spread of the pathogen COVID-19, has led, especially during its first phase, to a situation of scarcity of resources. The problem, in other words, consisted of a disproportion between the demand from individuals who needed to receive emergency care and a situation of limited resources, including health personnel, beds and necessary machinery. Therefore, the multifarious scientific societies have drawn up guidance documents to define access criteria on the basis of the ethical principles developed by Beauchamp and Childress. In light of such a background, the analysis focuses on the legal analysis of the first recommendations adopted in Italy (recommendations and guidelines elaborated first by Italian Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) and then amended by SIAARTI-Società Italiana Medicina Legale e delle Assicurazioni (SIMLA)). In this scenario, critical issues are identified and later analysed, also in the light of what was decided by the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (ASSM), as well as the British counterpart, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Ultimately, bio-law is at the mercy of a less reputed, yet more strategic, factor: bio-law-and-economics.