Much has been said about the ways in which features of the COVID‐19 pandemic have been politicised, with some seeing at least some of the rules as a serious infringement of individual liberty. The new situation in which we find ourselves in the current pandemic also requires (and is receiving) considerable bioethical reflection, including on the concepts of autonomy, solidarity and justice (for example, intergenerational justice). Of course, public health ethics has a long history of dealing with the tension between the freedom of the individual and public health, in relation to such matters as quarantine and vaccination. One thing that is particularly noticeable about the current situation, however, is the strength of the feelings that are being evoked in relation to abiding by the rules, or not. A survey undertaken by the UK think tank Demos 1 (at www.demos.co.uk) found that 12% of mask wearers said they ‘hate’ those who do not wear face coverings, while 14% of lockdown respecters expressed the same emotion towards rule breakers. The Demos report says ‘people are starting to see those who disagree with them on COVID as “bad” people. This threatens attempts to build national solidarity’ (Demos, 2020, p. 5). It is not entirely surprising that the study also found that retired people are the biggest supporters of lockdown (Demos, 2020, p. 11), given that older people are more at risk from the worst effects of the virus.
The findings are interesting and concerning. Hatred is several steps beyond social disapproval. It suggests that there may be something more here than concerns about the free rider problem, or even worries about direct threats to one’s personal safety, if people are being regarded as ‘bad’ regardless of the relative riskiness of their behaviour in particular situations. No doubt there will be, and indeed there needs to be, more empirical research on perceptions, as the pandemic experience continues to unfold, but there are also questions of a theoretical bioethical nature that are ongoing. These include: What, if anything, counts as an acceptable reason for breaking a rule? And the multiple aspects of social justice at stake in these discussions. The arrival of COVID‐19 has led to the production of a huge number of articles submitted to scientific and policy journals as well as to this one. There will inevitably be long‐term implications not only for society and public health but also for theory in bioethics. Perhaps most striking, however, in the light of the Demos findings, is the question of what the conditions for the possibility of social solidarity might be; and the implications for the applicability and usefulness of the principle of solidarity in bioethics.