At the event on teaching public health ethics in German-speaking countries, the topic was examined from two different perspectives.

The first impulse was given by Prof Dr Manfred Wildner, who looked at the topic from the perspective of the Public Health Service (ÖGD). He focussed in particular on the different ethical guiding principles of those working in the public health sector. It became clear that tensions and conflicts of interest can arise between the administrative ethos, the medical ethos and general ethical and political theories. A central aspect of his contribution was the threefold paradigm shift that is clearly noticeable in the public health service – especially since the corona pandemic. In conclusion, Prof Wildner emphasised the need for differentiated and target group-specific public health ethics teaching, for example for employees in the public health service.

The second contribution was made by PD Dr Solveig Hansen, who focused on the teaching-learning relationship in the teaching of ethical content in the public health context. Her presentation emphasised how important it is to create a learning space that takes aspects such as participation, diversity, sensitivity and recognition into account in order to enable students to access the topic of ethics. Especially in public health ethics, teachers are particularly challenged to be aware of their role as moral role models. Further information on ethical teaching content in public health degree programmes can be found in the attached presentation slides.

Various relevant aspects were addressed in the subsequent discussion. It was emphasised that population medicine must be considered beyond the mere sum of individual medical measures. Particularly with regard to public health ethics teaching for the ÖGD, the examination of the role of the health service under National Socialism was identified as a research topic that remains important and needs to be explored in greater depth. The approach of focussing more on the teaching-learning relationship met with broad approval. Various didactic methods were discussed, such as the use of case studies to illustrate ethical issues in teaching.

In this international seminar, Prof. Alison Thompson (University of Toronto, Canada) and Prof. Daniel Goldberg (University of Colorado, USA) shared their experiences and insights on teaching Public Health Ethics (PHE) in North America.

Alison Thompson traced the origins of PHE teaching back to the 2002 PHE Symposium. She emphasized a critical ethics approach. This approach was supposed to be rather bottom up than top down. Her courses are built around analyzing and applying texts, with key themes including surveillance, regulation, individual versus collective rights, precaution, and global health equity.

Daniel Goldberg highlighted four essential considerations in teaching PHE: understanding the target audience (primarily clinicians and health professionals), distinguishing PHE from healthcare ethics, critically engaging with the concept of justice as one of, if not the most important topic in PHE, and addressing the „no-villain problem“—the challenge of integrating PHE into already crowded curricula. He suggested embedding PHE content into law courses as one strategy.

In the discussion, both speakers stressed the importance of balancing philosophical depth with practical applicability. They advocated for the use of case studies and equipping students with tools to approach ethical issues. The need to recognize ethical challenges in public health and to aim for both equity and overall population benefit—the „twin aims“—was a recurring theme.

The session provided valuable insights into the current state and challenges of teaching PHE and fostered international exchange on best practices.

Katarzyna Czabanowska, PhD, MA, Professor of Public Health Leadership and Workforce Development, Department of International Health, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, The Netherlands
James C. Thomas, MPH, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA

The professionalization of its workforce has been a key topic to the field of public health for the last years, not only since the Covid-19-pandemic.

Bachelor and Master programmes in public health have been developed and taught in the last decades and public health institutions have been opened for graduates from this field. The public health community is discussing competences for learning in the field ever since. Ethics belongs to the concept of an academically educated “profession” and thus “professionalization” deals with the question how to implement an ethos, morals or ethics in the education and practice of the public health workforce.

One approach to integrate a moral point of view here is to develop and implement so called “Codes of Ethics” or “Codes of Conducts” and to learn how to apply them in practice, including solving conflicts among the norms presented in such a code. Are codes meaningful tools for this context? What norms, values and virtues should they entail? Would every local public health community develop its own “code”? These and other questions are pertinent to the international agenda of professionalization of the public health workforce – and will be raised during this academic online seminar.

Moderator: Dr. Peter Schröder-Bäck, Professor of Ethics, Institute of History and Ethics, University of Applied Sciences for Police and Public Administration North Rhine-Westphalia (HSPV NRW), Germany

Prof. Dr. Dr. hc mult Helmut Brand, Maastricht University
Prof. Dr. Ansgar Gerhardus, University of Bremen

The Federal Institute for Prevention and Education in Medicine (BIPAM) is currently being established. The Federal Minister of Health hopes that this will strengthen primary prevention and public health. The exact structure of the new federal institute is not yet known, but the Federal Center for Health Education and parts of the Robert Koch Institute are to be incorporated into this institute. This will reorganize public health institutions in Germany. Criticism of the planned BIPAM itself comes from institutions directly affected by the reorganization as well as from scientists who feel that a sustainable public health approach is lacking.

In our discussion round, we heard statements on the plans from two speakers with proven expertise and discussed the implications for public health ethics and health philosophy.

Dr. Jaouad Mahjour, Head of the WHO Secretariat to INB and IHR Amendments, was able to give an “Update on WHO international pandemic accord“: 

In December 2021, the World Health Assembly decided to establish an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft a WHO an agreement on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. In light of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO member states wanted to make sure that communities, governments and all sectors of society are better prepared and protected in order to prevent and respond to future pandemics. It is one of the central goals of the accord to ensure equity in accessing both tools to prevent pandemics and health care for all people.

Events before 2024 you can find here: https://public-health-ethik.de/vergangene-veranstaltungen/