Contact tracing is a medical practice designated by public health experts to monitor and contain the spread of infectious diseases. In the COVID-19 pandemic, it has been employed both regionally and globally, both traditionally by human tracer and newly by digital mobile applications. With its wide use, debates around contact tracing are also emerging. To what extent could contact tracing be effective? How is contact tracing concerned with control, privacy, and market? For a caring future, where and what are possibilities? Seeking insights on these questions, Professor Jocelyn Olcott, Tania Rispoli, and Yanping Ni organized a roundtable discussion on contact tracing on July 25th.
The discussion was conducted between four speakers: Susan Craddock, Professor in the Institute of Global Studies at the University of Minnesota; Mauro Turrini, a sociologist at the Institute of Public Goods and Policies of the Spanish National Research Council; Vincenzo Pavone, Director of the Institute of Public Goods and Policies of the Spanish National Research Council; and Morris Fabbri, a graduate from the MA in Bioethics and Science Policy at Duke University.
The workshop started with observations on the status quo of contact tracing. Fabbri, as a practitioner in the industry, lamented that contact tracing has not been effective due to a lack of trust. Craddock added that this issue of lack of trust existed in both governmental health sectors and private companies. Based on situations in Europe, Turrini pointed out that data collection in contact tracing triggered concerns on surveillance. Pavone reminded us that these challenges also varied among different age groups.
In addition, the effectiveness of contact tracing also depends on factors like resources. Craddock raised the fact that many simply do not have the housing conditions for quarantine even if they want to obey tracers’ advice. Turrini echoed that residents in densely populated cities could hardly find space for isolation. Pavone, with Spain as an example, stressed regional differences in resource allocation and economical levels.
Despite the challenges, the speakers still showed optimism about the future development and innovation. Fabbri stressed that contact tracing could be more useful if it could help the sharing of information at the beginning of the pandemic. Expanding from that point, Craddock believed that the current situation should be a window that illuminates the flaws in the healthcare system and encourages structural changes. In particular, Craddock advocated for care on the community scale. Turrini foresaw that sharing of information could be a way of caring for the public despite the sacrifices of individual’s privacy. Last but not least, Pavone hoped that contact tracing could be the embryo of a network of care that would persist in the post-COVID-19 era.
Gender, Sexuality Feminist Studies