Opinion: the new social distancing norms can have an unequal impact on different groups and are challenging to enforce
With the lifting of restrictions already underway, a vaccine yet to become publicly available, and speculation that intermittent social distancing might be needed until 2022, we need to prepare ourselves for living with Covid-19 for some time. So what are the moral concerns regarding the impact of this new norm on different groups - and the challenges of enforcing it?
Following Taoiseach Leo Varadkar's announcement in Washington DC on March 12th, and in an effort to minimise contact between healthy and potentially infected individuals, the HSE offered the following advice: "You should: keep a space of 2 metres (6.5 feet) between you and other people…There is very little risk if you are just passing someone. But try to keep a distance of 2 metres as much as possible".
Besides being vague in describing the right action, variations in vulnerabilities of different social groups seem to have been overlooked in the communication of this new norm. Accordingly, the HSE's message may not resonate equally with different members of the society, which may result in inconsistent application of the norms of social distancing.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's News At One, Aisling Moloney finds out how social distancing works for the immunosuppressed
When it comes to upholding this new norm, a disparity may exist in terms of how certain groups of citizens who are more vulnerable to infection than others understand social distancing. In a world without a vaccine for Covid-19, young and healthy groups are likely to be much more easygoing about transgression of the new norm, because it is probably the second part of the HSE recommendation that resonates with them the most ("try to keep a distance of 2 metres as much as possible"). In contrast, since the matter of infection is a question of life and death for the old and vulnerable, they are more likely to take the first part of the HSE’s recommendation as the norm that should be followed by everyone ("You should: keep a space of 2 metres (6.5 feet) between you and other people".
With the government planning to ease and eventually lift current restrictions, vulnerable and non-vulnerable groups will have to share public spaces with each other. With the development of a vaccine and full immunity against the virus a long way away, the lax attitude of young and healthy towards the norm of social distancing may frustrate the old and vulnerable. As a result, the latter group may prefer to minimise their use of public spaces until the virus is fully eradicated. This may further marginalise these vulnerable groups.
Sticking labels on the ground in supermarkets, drawing lines in areas around the shops where customers queue or painting a sample 2-metre line in the parks demonstrate the awareness of businesses and public authorities about the importance of social distancing. However, some small shops or properties that are not designed to accommodate a 2-metre distance may not be interested in promoting these norms, or worse, undermine them. It is not currently clear if these nudging techniques should be identical, omnipresent and mandatory to follow, or whether it will be acceptable to make exceptions.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's News At One, RTÉ Consumer Affairs Correspondent Fran McNulty on social distancing measures in supermarkets
To help enforce the new norm, the Health Act 1947 granted An Garda Síochána the power to use strict measure to restrict the spread of the virus. The Citizen Information Centre notes that "any offence is punishable by a fine of up to €2,500, up to six months imprisonment or a combination of both". Furthermore, gardaí have also received the power to arrest without warrant and detention in cases where a person is considered to be "a potential source of infection and, a risk to public health and, detention is necessary to slow the spread of Covid-19".
While these strict and unprecedented measures could be seen as an effective deterrent strategy in the short term, they seem to be unsuitable to enforce in the long run, challenging to enforce in special cases and unfit for cases where the transgression is committed by groups of people. In terms of using them in the long run, when the risk of infection is lower but still present, the gardaí may be unable to dedicate the required resources to monitor and enforce current/revised regulations because they would have to deal with non-Covid-19-related issues.
In cases of misdemeanours such as inadvertent sneezing without covering the mouth or transgressions committed by non-adults, the suggested measures could be considered disproportionate. Their enforcement could remain restricted to severe cases only, resulting in inconsistent application of the agreed punishment, which may further undermine the norm.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ's Pandemic podcast, RTÉ Legal Correspondent Orla O'Donnell sums up the blunt dismissal of John Waters and Gemma O'Doherty's anti-lockdown High Court action
If reckless behaviour comes from a group of people, punishing individuals within that group is much more troublesome. Once norms are flouted collectively and simultaneously, it is extremely challenging to come up with a proportionate punishment or figure out which individual(s) to hold responsible.
The large gathering in support of John Waters and Gemma O'Doherty outside the Four Courts in Dublin on April 21st was a classic example of this scenario. According to the Health Act 1947, this gathering was a punishable offence that took place in front of the country’s highest legal authority. Should we only expect a punishment for Waters and O’Doherty, or also all the others who gathered and posed for the group photo that day?
While providing the right answer for questions and concerns raised here may not always be possible, thinking about them from different perspectives helps citizens to get a sense of their scale and complexity. Without deluding ourselves into thinking that the aforementioned concerns represent an exhaustive list of issues, exploring these issues and making ourselves heard can hopefully improve future policies.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
