Reciprocity, Fairness and the Financial Burden of Undertaking COVID-19 Hotel Quarantine in Australia
In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult...
Saved in:
Published in | Public health ethics Vol. 17; no. 1-2; pp. 67 - 79 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
England
Oxford University Press
01.04.2024
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control. |
---|---|
AbstractList | In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control. In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control. In March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had then been allowed sufficient time to return, and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the ethical demands of reciprocity. In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control.In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control. |
Author | Pahlman, Kari Taffs, Louis Haire, Bridget Silva, Diego S Williams, Jane |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Kari orcidid: 0000-0003-1259-5120 surname: Pahlman fullname: Pahlman, Kari – sequence: 2 givenname: Jane surname: Williams fullname: Williams, Jane – sequence: 3 givenname: Diego S orcidid: 0000-0002-8195-6404 surname: Silva fullname: Silva, Diego S – sequence: 4 givenname: Louis surname: Taffs fullname: Taffs, Louis – sequence: 5 givenname: Bridget surname: Haire fullname: Haire, Bridget |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39005526$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNpVkd1LHDEUxUOx-FWffJc8Cu1oviazeRK77VZBEEvta7iT3HGjs8mazBT87zvidrEPl3vh_jgHzjkgOzFFJOSYszPOjDxfL3Ea8Ew0H8g-b2pVGTPjO9u7kXvkoJRHxrRQot4le9IwVtdC7xP_E11Y5-TC8PKFLiDkiKVQiJ4OS6SLECG6AD39OmaPkaaO3kePeYCnEB_o_Pb39beKG3qVBuzp3QgZ4hAi0hDp5ViGDH2AT-RjB33Bo80-JPeL77_mV9XN7Y_r-eVN5aRiQ-VRcwazznHplNazzmhsvOoctNgq41mrNXSuFkIxIZxSUgI41TqJpvGyk4fk4k13PbYr9A7jq79d57CC_GITBPv_J4alfUh_LOdC1dqoSeF0o5DT84hlsKtQHPY9RExjsZLNmJa14nJCT96bbV3-ZTsBn98Al1MpGbstwpl9bc5OzdlNc_IvkbSN4Q |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.ssmph.2022.101329 10.1080/15265160802180059 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2021.100034 10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613 10.1111/1467-8462.12503 10.1007/s40592-022-00151-x 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31032-1 10.1007/s11673-009-9149-2 10.53637/NHGB1203 10.1080/13523260.2020.1771955 10.1136/medethics-2020-107104 10.3998/jpe.1519 10.1186/s12889-022-13339-x 10.1007/s40592-020-00104-2 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 10.1007/s11673-009-9160-7 10.1111/josp.12408 10.2307/healhumarigh.17.1.52 10.1080/13642987.2022.2058496 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002629 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 10.5694/mja2.51046 10.1007/s11673-015-9691-z |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. 2023 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. – notice: The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. 2023 |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION NPM 7X8 5PM |
DOI | 10.1093/phe/phad027 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Public Health |
EISSN | 1754-9981 |
EndPage | 79 |
ExternalDocumentID | PMC11245694 39005526 10_1093_phe_phad027 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: ; – fundername: ; grantid: 1116530 |
GroupedDBID | --- .2P .I3 .ZR 0R~ 123 4.4 48X 5VS 5WD 70D AABCJ AABZA AACZT AAFXQ AAJKP AAMDB AAMVS AAMZS AAOGV AAPNW AAPQZ AAPXW AARHZ AAUAY AAUOS AAVAP AAYXX ABDBF ABDFA ABEJV ABEUO ABGNP ABICN ABIXL ABJNI ABKDP ABKEB ABNHQ ABNKS ABPQP ABPTD ABQLI ABVGC ABWST ABXVK ABXVV ABYLZ ABZBJ ACGFS ACHQT ACMCV ACOZV ACQVJ ACUFI ACUTO ACVHY ADAES ADBBV ADBKU ADEYI ADGZP ADHKW ADHZD ADIPN ADLOL ADNBA ADOCK ADQBN ADQIT ADRTK ADVEK ADYLA ADYVW ADZXQ AEGPL AEJER AEJOX AEKSI AEMDU AENEX AENZO AEPUE AETBJ AEWNT AFCKW AFFZL AFHLB AFIYH AFOFC AFSJJ AFVIK AFVSF AGFCL AGINJ AGKEF AGORE AGQXC AGQZG AGSYK AHDHG AHGBF AHMMS AHXPO AIJHB AJBYB AJEEA AJNCP AKWXX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQC ALXQX AMHCJ APIBT APWMN ASPYK ATGXG AXUDD AYLYT BAYMD BCRHZ BEYMZ BHONS BHZBG BOXDG BTRTY BVRKM BWUDY CDBKE CITATION CNZYI CS3 CZ4 DAKXR DILTD D~K EBS EE~ ESX ETYVG EYXSX F5P F9B FLUFQ FOEOM FOTVD FQBLK FTKQU GAUVT GJXCC H13 H5~ HAR HW0 HZ~ IOX J21 JXSIZ KOP KSI KSN M-Z MJWOD MXSPP N9A NGC NOMLY NOYVH NPJNY O9- OAWHX OCZFY ODMLO OJQWA OJZSN OPAEJ OWPYF OXVUA P2P PAFKI PEELM PLIXB Q1. Q5Y RD5 ROX RUSNO RW1 RXO TJH TJJ TJX X7H YADRA YAJVU YAYTL YKOAZ YXANX ~91 ~D7 ~SN 1TH 29P 2WC AAGQS AAJQQ AAUQX AAZDW ABBHK ABQTQ ABXSQ ACUHS ADJQC ADRIX ADULT AEJYH AEUPB AFXEN AILCM AOLPF EBD EJD JENOY JKPJF JPL JPM JSODD JST JVCUD KBUDW M49 NPM NU- O0~ O5R O5S SA0 THA TUS 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-de610a8fc13c4668f96e7d4fcabeb49d0b66afc5224022c4433aac4bc3e97d3f3 |
ISSN | 1754-9973 |
IngestDate | Thu Aug 21 18:32:51 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 05:27:12 EDT 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:03:56 EST 2025 Tue Jul 01 03:15:10 EDT 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 1-2 |
Language | English |
License | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
LinkModel | OpenURL |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c340t-de610a8fc13c4668f96e7d4fcabeb49d0b66afc5224022c4433aac4bc3e97d3f3 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ORCID | 0000-0003-1259-5120 0000-0002-8195-6404 |
OpenAccessLink | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC11245694 |
PMID | 39005526 |
PQID | 3080635413 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
PageCount | 13 |
ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11245694 proquest_miscellaneous_3080635413 pubmed_primary_39005526 crossref_primary_10_1093_phe_phad027 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2024-04-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2024-04-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 04 year: 2024 text: 2024-04-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | England |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England – name: UK |
PublicationTitle | Public health ethics |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Public Health Ethics |
PublicationYear | 2024 |
Publisher | Oxford University Press |
Publisher_xml | – name: Oxford University Press |
References | Braun (2024071310511545000_CIT0005) 2006; 3 Cameron (2024071310511545000_CIT0008) 2021; 47 Upshur (2024071310511545000_CIT0040) 2003; 5 Tobin (2024071310511545000_CIT0038) 2020 Coronavirus Victoria (2024071310511545000_CIT0011) 2021 NSW Government (2024071310511545000_CIT0025) 2020 Silva (2024071310511545000_CIT0035) 2016; 13 Coate (2024071310511545000_CIT0010) 2020 Silva (2024071310511545000_CIT0033) 2022; 40 Gostin (2024071310511545000_CIT0018) 2003; 290 Visontay (2024071310511545000_CIT0043) 2020 Parliament of Australia (2024071310511545000_CIT0026) 2020 Fotheringham (2024071310511545000_CIT0017) 2023; 21 Haire (2024071310511545000_CIT0019) 2022; 22 Halton (2024071310511545000_CIT0020) 2021 Tobin (2024071310511545000_CIT0039) 2021 Jolkina (2024071310511545000_CIT0023) 2021 World Health Organization (2024071310511545000_CIT0046) 2005 Foster (2024071310511545000_CIT0016) 2021; 44 Fenton (2024071310511545000_CIT0014) 2021; 9 Soutphommasane (2024071310511545000_CIT0037) 2021 Becker (2024071310511545000_CIT0002) 1986 Holm (2024071310511545000_CIT0021) 2009; 6 Sheel (2024071310511545000_CIT0032) 2021 Carter (2024071310511545000_CIT0009) 2019 Ferhani (2024071310511545000_CIT0015) 2020; 41 Simic (2024071310511545000_CIT0036) 2023; 27 Bennett (2024071310511545000_CIT0003) 2022; 43 Borland (2024071310511545000_CIT0004) 2023; 56 Lee (2024071310511545000_CIT0024) 2020; 395 Dinh (2024071310511545000_CIT0013) 2021; 214 Braun (2024071310511545000_CIT0007) 2019; 11 Williams (2024071310511545000_CIT0045) 2022; 2 Queensland Government (2024071310511545000_CIT0028) 2023 ACT Health (2024071310511545000_CIT0001) 2023 Revenue NSW (2024071310511545000_CIT0031) 2021 Silva (2024071310511545000_CIT0034) 2015; 17 Braun (2024071310511545000_CIT0006) 2017; 12 Department of Health (2024071310511545000_CIT0012) 2020 Viens (2024071310511545000_CIT0041) 2008; 8 von Tigerstrom (2024071310511545000_CIT0044) 2020; 5 World Health Organization (2024071310511545000_CIT0047) 2021 Holm (2024071310511545000_CIT0022) 2020; 38 Viens (2024071310511545000_CIT0042) 2009; 6 Pugh (2024071310511545000_CIT0027) 2021 Queensland Health (2024071310511545000_CIT0029) 2023 Randall (2024071310511545000_CIT0030) 2021; 52 |
References_xml | – volume: 21 start-page: 101329 year: 2023 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0017 article-title: Protecting Mental Health in Quarantine: Exploring Lived Experiences of Healthcare in Mandatory COVID-19 Quarantine, New South Wales, Australia publication-title: SSM – Population Health doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2022.101329 – volume: 8 start-page: 1 year: 2008 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0041 article-title: Public Health, Ethical Behaviour and Reciprocity publication-title: The American Journal of Bioethics doi: 10.1080/15265160802180059 – volume-title: Reciprocity year: 1986 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0002 – volume: 2 start-page: 100034 year: 2022 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0045 article-title: Uncertainty and Agency in COVID-19 Hotel Quarantine in Australia publication-title: SSM – Qualitative Research in Health doi: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2021.100034 – volume-title: ABC News year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0038 article-title: As Coronavirus Restrictions Tighten, Returning Australians Risk Losing Their Flights If They Don’t Upgrade to Business Class – volume: 12 start-page: 297 year: 2017 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0006 article-title: Thematic Analysis publication-title: The Journal of Positive Psychology doi: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613 – start-page: 547 volume-title: The SAGE Handbook of Current Developments in Grounded Theory year: 2019 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0009 article-title: Grounded Theory and Empirical Ethics – volume: 56 start-page: 109 year: 2023 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0004 article-title: JobKeeper: An Initial Assessment publication-title: The Australian Economic Review doi: 10.1111/1467-8462.12503 – volume-title: The Guardian year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0043 article-title: ACCC Investigates Complaints About Airlines Flying to Australia During Covid-19 – volume-title: Fees and Payment for Isolation and Quarantine year: 2023 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0028 – volume-title: COVID-19 Hotel Quarantine Inquiry: Interim Report and Recommendations year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0010 – volume-title: Public Health Act 1997: Republication No 41 Effective 30 September 2023 year: 2023 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0001 – volume: 40 start-page: 94 year: 2022 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0033 article-title: The Abandonment of Australians in India: An Analysis of the Right of Entry as a Security Right in the Age of COVID-19 publication-title: Monash Bioethics Review doi: 10.1007/s40592-022-00151-x – volume-title: Accommodation Arrivals: Contribution Fees for Hotel Quarantine year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0011 – volume: 395 start-page: 1593 year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0024 article-title: Global Coordination on Cross-Border Travel and Trade Measures Crucial to COVID-19 Response publication-title: The Lancet doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31032-1 – volume: 5 start-page: 523 year: 2003 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0040 article-title: The Ethics of Quarantine publication-title: Virtual Mentor – AMA Journal of Ethics – volume: 6 start-page: 207 year: 2009 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0042 article-title: Your Liberty or Your Life: Reciprocity in the Use of Restrictive Measures in Contexts of Contagion publication-title: Bioethical Inquiry doi: 10.1007/s11673-009-9149-2 – volume: 44 start-page: 103 year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0016 article-title: Refugee Protection in the COVID-19 Crisis and Beyond: The Capacity and Limits of International Law publication-title: University of New South Wales Law Journal doi: 10.53637/NHGB1203 – volume-title: Practical Ethics year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0027 article-title: An Ethical Review of Hotel Quarantine Policies for International Arrivals – volume: 41 start-page: 458 year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0015 article-title: The International Health Regulations, COVID-19, and Bordering Practices: Who Gets in, What Gets Out, and Who Gets Rescued publication-title: Contemporary Security Policy doi: 10.1080/13523260.2020.1771955 – volume-title: Public Health Act 2005: Current as at 1 November 2023 year: 2023 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0029 – volume: 290 start-page: 3229 year: 2003 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0018 article-title: Ethical and Legal Challenges Posed by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome: Implications for the Control of Severe Infectious Disease Threats publication-title: Health Law and Ethics – volume-title: ANU College of Health and Medicine News year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0032 article-title: International Borders Are About to Open, but Our Research Shows the Plight of Stranded Australians is Not Over – volume-title: NSW to Charge Returned International Travellers for Hotel Quarantine year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0025 – volume: 47 start-page: 553 year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0008 article-title: Ethics of Selective Restriction of Liberty in a Pandemic publication-title: Journal of Medical Ethics doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-107104 – volume: 9 start-page: 1 year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0014 article-title: Reciprocity and Resources publication-title: Journal of Practical Ethics doi: 10.3998/jpe.1519 – volume: 22 start-page: 953 year: 2022 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0019 article-title: Experiences of Risk in Australian Hotel Quarantine: A Qualitative Study publication-title: BMC Public Health doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13339-x – volume: 38 start-page: 32 year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0022 article-title: A General Approach to Compensation for Losses Incurred due to Public Health Interventions in the Infectious Disease Context publication-title: Monash Bioethics Review doi: 10.1007/s40592-020-00104-2 – volume-title: Transcript of Press Conference: Australian Parliament House, ACT: 27 March 2020: National Cabinet Meeting; Coronavirus; G20 Meeting; Returned Traveller Quarantine Measures; Economy; Plan to Hibernate Australian Businesses; Possible Stage 3 Restrictions; Schools; Childcare; China; Australians Overseas; Tenancy Measures; Supply of Medical Equipment; and Hospitals year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0026 – volume-title: Pandemic Strips Away the Myth of Equality year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0037 – volume: 11 start-page: 589 year: 2019 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0007 article-title: Reflecting on Reflexive Thematic Analysis publication-title: Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 – volume: 43 start-page: 403 year: 2022 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0003 article-title: COVID-19 and the Future of Australian Public Health Law publication-title: Adelaide Law Review – volume: 6 start-page: 197 year: 2009 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0021 article-title: Should Persons Detained During Public Health Crises Receive Compensation publication-title: Bioethical Inquiry doi: 10.1007/s11673-009-9160-7 – volume: 52 start-page: 516 year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0030 article-title: Reciprocity and the Ethics of Giving During Pandemics publication-title: Journal of Social Philosophy doi: 10.1111/josp.12408 – volume: 17 start-page: 52 year: 2015 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0034 article-title: Limiting Rights and Freedoms in the Context of Ebola and Other Public Health Emergencies: How the Principle of Reciprocity Can Enrich the Application of the Siracusa Principles publication-title: Health and Human Rights doi: 10.2307/healhumarigh.17.1.52 – volume-title: ABC News year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0039 article-title: Hotel Quarantine Guests Charged Up to $1,400 Extra for Access to a Balcony – volume-title: International Health Regulations (2005) Third Edition year: 2005 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0046 – volume-title: Paying for Hotel Quarantine in WA: Frequently Asked Questions year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0012 – volume-title: National Review of Quarantine year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0020 – volume-title: Quarantine Fees year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0031 – volume: 27 start-page: 830 year: 2023 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0036 article-title: The Challenge of ‘COVID-19 free’ Australia: International Travel Restrictions and Stranded Australians publication-title: International Journal of Human Rights doi: 10.1080/13642987.2022.2058496 – volume: 5 start-page: e002629 year: 2020 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0044 article-title: COVID-19 Travel Restrictions and the International Health Regulations (2005) publication-title: BMJ Global Health doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002629 – volume-title: London School of Economics and Political Science COVID-19 blog year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0023 article-title: £2,285 for the Right to Return Home – Or Why the UK’s Hotel Quarantine Scheme Went Too Far – volume: 3 start-page: 77 year: 2006 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0005 article-title: Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology publication-title: Qualitative Research in Psychology doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa – volume: 214 start-page: 473 year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0013 article-title: Emergency Department Presentations from Quarantine Hotels in Sydney, Australia, During the COVID-19 Outbreak – An Analysis of Clinical Patterns and Outcomes publication-title: Medical Journal of Australia doi: 10.5694/mja2.51046 – volume-title: COVID-19 Virtual Press Conference Transcript – 14 May 2021 year: 2021 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0047 – volume: 13 start-page: 75 year: 2016 ident: 2024071310511545000_CIT0035 article-title: Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control publication-title: Bioethical Inquiry doi: 10.1007/s11673-015-9691-z |
SSID | ssj0062425 |
Score | 2.300303 |
Snippet | In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities... |
SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref |
SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database |
StartPage | 67 |
SubjectTerms | Original |
Title | Reciprocity, Fairness and the Financial Burden of Undertaking COVID-19 Hotel Quarantine in Australia |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39005526 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3080635413 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC11245694 |
Volume | 17 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3JbtswECVa51KgKNp0czewQG6uGkWkJOuYTXBTNwlQu_BN4FoLMKQgkXPI12dEUrKU5JD2Qhi0QQkzz8M35CwI7cA_BrY58FS5Zsqjccw9IPXgrCSaJTIkcs_E5vw6jSZzerIIF5tuoya7pOLfxc2DeSX_o1WYA73WWbL_oNl2UZiAz6BfGEHDMD5Kx8D58noHcpX9U5ZfGsvVREWmbTkNm61QM0PT6KgyPahGh2d_fhyBwEaTslIrE-DJ6s4RqncK0uWv552q2MuR6gXLn7Plyp2n_gQP_KETnRO2ucX_na-u7WVTrv6Wo84ZgrahjNNynfdOJYJuMIs1pHFIQeu2TUlraeMuolzaozWctifHPXtua11dLJUZmfRtIYF-3ezTsyydT6fZ7Hgxe4q2AnAYggHa2j84OkibXblOgwlNcqx7L5erCQ_YheV33eJ9dnLP5bgbOduhIrOX6IXzIfC-BcQr9EQV2-i5VQ22eWWvkeyA4xtuoIEBGhiggVtoYAsNXGrcgQZuoIENNPAGGjgvcAuNN2ieHs8OJ55rqeEJQv3KkwroMhtrsUcEjaKxTiIVS6oF44rTRPo8ipgWYU30gkBQSghjgnJBVBJLoslbNCjKQr1HOALmCb69kDBNqY544I85iX0d6IRQrodopxFldmErp2Q24oFkIPHMSXyIvjZizsCy1ddVAMVyfZURcGaADgPLGqJ3VuztQmBe_DAMoiEa9xTS_qCumt7_psiXpno6OBjgNCT0wyMe_BE924D7ExpUl2v1GUhoxb84fN0Cp56NVQ |
linkProvider | EBSCOhost |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reciprocity%2C+Fairness+and+the+Financial+Burden+of+Undertaking+COVID-19+Hotel+Quarantine+in+Australia&rft.jtitle=Public+health+ethics&rft.au=Pahlman%2C+Kari&rft.au=Williams%2C+Jane&rft.au=Silva%2C+Diego+S&rft.au=Taffs%2C+Louis&rft.date=2024-04-01&rft.issn=1754-9973&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=1-2&rft.spage=67&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093%2Fphe%2Fphad027&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1754-9973&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1754-9973&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1754-9973&client=summon |