Finding Common Ground: Wrestling With Medical Governance During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Annika Dirkse, Medical Student, Theology, Medicine and Culture Fellow, UNC School of Medicine/Duke Divinity School
Jeffrey Bishop describes a “biopolitics” of sociologic, psychologic, and medical norms that govern modern secular society.[1] Not only do these norms define how an individual should function within society, they also create a self-perpetuating research agenda and didactic framework. This facilitates governance by these norms over an ever-greater swath of society. Reintroducing the spiritual under this model subjugates it to the political power of the world conceptualized and operationalized by the social sciences. This widens the swath of human life over which this model claims governance, increasing its political power. Thus, an important role of the sacred within medicine is to critique the supposed political neutrality of modern medicine and suggest limits for the scope of medical governance in society.
Interestingly, conservative Christian groups who protest mask mandates and decline vaccination provide one such critique of medical governance in our lives, focusing particularly on individual liberty over risk-aversion. For those who support masks, vaccination, and other public health measures, this raises the question of whether one should resist the concept of medical governance during a time of pandemic. This paper enumerates and evaluates the ways in which right-wing criticism of pandemic public health guidelines serves as a critique of medical governance, and ways that it differs from prior such critiques. The author will seek to identify common narratives between the right-wing conservative critique of public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic and critiques endorsed by other religious providers who endorse most public health guidelines. Attention will also be given to places where these narratives diverge. This analysis will be used to demonstrate how critique of medical governance is still appropriate during a pandemic.
Taking into account this common ground, the author will propose a narrative for the role of religious practitioners of all faiths in resisting medical governance in the setting of COVID-19 that acknowledges that modern medicine is not politically neutral. This narrative will focus on compassion and community health as the basis for public health decision making, rather than on liberty or risk-aversion. It will drawn on Luther’s ideas about public health as well as catholic social teaching. The author will demonstrate that engaging common language can help foster dialogue and greater unity between different religious groups with disparate views. In doing so, a religious perspective is well-equipped to both promote community and public health while still resisting medical governance over society.
[1] Jeffery P Bishop, “Biopsychosocialspiritual Medicine and Other Political Schemes,” Christian Bioethics, 0 (2009): 11
Interestingly, conservative Christian groups who protest mask mandates and decline vaccination provide one such critique of medical governance in our lives, focusing particularly on individual liberty over risk-aversion. For those who support masks, vaccination, and other public health measures, this raises the question of whether one should resist the concept of medical governance during a time of pandemic. This paper enumerates and evaluates the ways in which right-wing criticism of pandemic public health guidelines serves as a critique of medical governance, and ways that it differs from prior such critiques. The author will seek to identify common narratives between the right-wing conservative critique of public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic and critiques endorsed by other religious providers who endorse most public health guidelines. Attention will also be given to places where these narratives diverge. This analysis will be used to demonstrate how critique of medical governance is still appropriate during a pandemic.
Taking into account this common ground, the author will propose a narrative for the role of religious practitioners of all faiths in resisting medical governance in the setting of COVID-19 that acknowledges that modern medicine is not politically neutral. This narrative will focus on compassion and community health as the basis for public health decision making, rather than on liberty or risk-aversion. It will drawn on Luther’s ideas about public health as well as catholic social teaching. The author will demonstrate that engaging common language can help foster dialogue and greater unity between different religious groups with disparate views. In doing so, a religious perspective is well-equipped to both promote community and public health while still resisting medical governance over society.
[1] Jeffery P Bishop, “Biopsychosocialspiritual Medicine and Other Political Schemes,” Christian Bioethics, 0 (2009): 11