ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2026
An Ethical Justification of Health Workers' Strikes in Zimbabwe during COVID-19 : A Perspective Based on African Partiality and Ubuntu.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated health resource scarcity in many countries. Due to the shortage of medical equipment, some health workers in Zimbabwe refused to provide health services until these needs were addressed. In this article, we analyse the case of withdrawal of services by health workers in Zimbabwe and contend that they were morally justified in doing this. To forward this thesis, we try for the first time to use the African values of partiality and social harmony to evaluate the morality of health workers striking during a pandemic. The first set of arguments, based on the African ethics of partiality, is divided into two sub-arguments: namely, that the health workers were justified in withdrawing medical services because they held special duties to their families which could be violated if they had provided health services without the use of protection, and that it is psychologically unrealistic to demand that health workers put their families at risk. The second set of arguments upholds that the actions of the health workers are grounded in the idea of Ubuntu/social harmony and, therefore, are morally justified. Finally, we contend that although our thesis implies some hierarchies, not only may these be morally justified, but they are also not necessarily incompatible with the ethical standards of equality, universality, and non-favouritism. Although the case of Zimbabwe serves as an illuminating example, the way we formulate this thesis indicates that the arguments can be generalized to similar settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41870868What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.