Hospital visitation policies in public health crises: Exploration of ethical tensions between infection control measures and the rights of disabled and other vulnerable patients for advocacy & support

Abstract: We present a case study that highlights a 34-year-old woman with Turner Syndrome and cognitive limitations, who faced severe medical complications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite her vulnerabilities and need for advocacy support, visitation restrictions prevented family caregivers from being present, resulting in traumatic care experiences, communication barriers, and compromised decision-making. Only after legal intervention was an exception made for a loved one to be at her bedside. This presentation will analyze the ethical tensions between institutional infection control measures and the rights of disabled and other vulnerable patients to have essential advocacy and support.

Public health policies that take extreme positions—whether implementing absolute visitor bans or legislative prohibitions on healthcare facilities' ability to establish appropriate restrictions—can create significant harm. Complete visitor bans may protect against infection transmission but can lead to devastating consequences for vulnerable patients who require advocacy support. Conversely, state laws preventing hospitals from implementing any visitor restrictions during infectious disease outbreaks may protect individual rights but potentially endanger broader public health by limiting infection control measures. This presentation will examine how nuanced, case-by-case approaches that balance individual needs with community protection can better serve both vulnerable patients and public health goals.
It will offer recommendations for developing more equitable visitation policies that recognize family caregivers as necessary partners in healthcare delivery rather than optional visitors, particularly for patients with communication or cognitive differences.

Keywords: Disability, Public health, Patient advocacy