The document discusses the use of curfews in the Philippines and other countries amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. It notes that President Rodrigo Duterte declared wide lockdowns, closure of public places, travel restrictions, and a curfew from 9pm to 4am due to rising COVID-19 cases. While curfews aim to prevent infection by distancing people, the Norwegian Medical Association and other groups refute that curfews are an appropriate measure as physical contact, not just being outdoors, enables infection. They argue authorities must show the anticipated added benefits of curfews outweigh negative effects and that knowledge of infection rates alone does not justify curfews.
The Effects and Implications of R.A. No. 11166 (Philippine HIV & AIDS Policy Act) Towards The Limiting and Facilitative Factors For Voluntary Counseling and Testing (VCT)
The document discusses the use of curfews in the Philippines and other countries amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. It notes that President Rodrigo Duterte declared wide lockdowns, closure of public places, travel restrictions, and a curfew from 9pm to 4am due to rising COVID-19 cases. While curfews aim to prevent infection by distancing people, the Norwegian Medical Association and other groups refute that curfews are an appropriate measure as physical contact, not just being outdoors, enables infection. They argue authorities must show the anticipated added benefits of curfews outweigh negative effects and that knowledge of infection rates alone does not justify curfews.
The document discusses the use of curfews in the Philippines and other countries amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. It notes that President Rodrigo Duterte declared wide lockdowns, closure of public places, travel restrictions, and a curfew from 9pm to 4am due to rising COVID-19 cases. While curfews aim to prevent infection by distancing people, the Norwegian Medical Association and other groups refute that curfews are an appropriate measure as physical contact, not just being outdoors, enables infection. They argue authorities must show the anticipated added benefits of curfews outweigh negative effects and that knowledge of infection rates alone does not justify curfews.
The document discusses the use of curfews in the Philippines and other countries amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. It notes that President Rodrigo Duterte declared wide lockdowns, closure of public places, travel restrictions, and a curfew from 9pm to 4am due to rising COVID-19 cases. While curfews aim to prevent infection by distancing people, the Norwegian Medical Association and other groups refute that curfews are an appropriate measure as physical contact, not just being outdoors, enables infection. They argue authorities must show the anticipated added benefits of curfews outweigh negative effects and that knowledge of infection rates alone does not justify curfews.
COMMON VIOLATORS AND THEIR VIOLATIONS OF CURFEW HOURS AMIDST
PANDEMIC IN SELECTED BARANGAY OF TAGOLOAN MISAMIS ORIENTAL: A
DOCUMENTARY RESEARCH METHOD signs R.A no. 11469 or the “BAYANIHAN TO HEAL AS ONE ACT” to respond covid 19- Pandemic.
Furthermore, it is stipulated on the Executive Order No. 95
series of 2020 "Prescribing General Guidelines for the country
while it is under Modified General Community Quarantine",
whereas, a general curfew from 9 o’clock in the evening until 4
o’clock in the morning shall take effect in the entire country
except for those who work in the medical field and other people
who are authorized to go out in public. (International Journal of
Innovative Science and Research Technology)
633 suspected cases were reported as of March 1 (Trop Med
Health.), Due to its arising cases, the president of the Republic of the Philippines Mr. Rodrigo Roa Duterte declared a wide lockdowns, closure of schools, parks, public gathering places, travelling except for those who have work or working in the medical field and other people who are authorized to go out in public, and curfew where all people prohibited to go outside beyond the time frame or curfew time range.
The evaluation also concluded that previously documented
successes of the curfew for crime protection and child protection had been achieved through displacement of young people to other locations that neither reduced crime nor increase safety. After the project was suddenly curtailed, analysis used moral panic theory to examine the legacy of the Northbridge curfew in terms of discourse about young people and legitimation of subsequent practices in youth policing. The analysis found that the legacy had been unhelpful because it reinforced the erroneous beliefs that the curfew had been an effective and necessary component of strategy. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a highly infectious disease in which led to a dramatic loss of human life. This unprecedented virus challenge to public health, food systems and the world of work. According to WHO (WORLD HEALT ORGANIZTION), the pandemic has been affecting the entire economic and social disruption caused by the pandemic is devastating: people are at risk of falling into extreme poverty, and nearly half of the world’s global workforce are at risk of losing their livelihoods.
According to the authorities, the use of a curfew as a measure to control the
pandemic is justified by medical knowledge that the virus is transmitted via human hosts in close proximity in time and space. A curfew thus aligns with the apparently endless list of infection control measures provided for in the Norwegian Communicable Diseases Control Act, aiming at preventing infection transmission by ensuring distance between potential carriers of the virus and new hosts – until the latter group have gained immunity through vaccination. However, in its consultation submission, the Norwegian Medical Association points out that it is primarily physical contact among humans that paves the way for infection, not simply being outdoors (10). Hence, the Norwegian Medical Association refutes the assertion that a curfew is an appropriate measure. The same conclusion is emphasised by several consultative bodies such as the Faculty of Law at UiT The Arctic University, Fredrikstad Municipality, Oslo Municipality, the Legal Policy Association, and the University of South-Eastern Norway (1). If relevant, medical advice advocating the use of a curfew must focus on the anticipated added benefits of this measure in comparison with less intrusive measures – and weigh these against negative side effects. High infection rates, and the fact that other measures are regarded as inadequate, are based on medical knowledge, but knowledge of the infection situation provides no professional, empirical, or scientific evidence that can justify the introduction of curfews. As being pointed out by (Madsen, 2021), Curfews are frequently
claimed to have proven effective in reducing infection rates in
countries where they have been used, and aiming at preventing
infection transmission by ensuring distance between potential
The Effects and Implications of R.A. No. 11166 (Philippine HIV & AIDS Policy Act) Towards The Limiting and Facilitative Factors For Voluntary Counseling and Testing (VCT)