[GA - Passed] Ensuring Safe Syringe Use

Ensuring Safe Syringe Use
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Healthcare
Proposed by: Sylvai | Onsite Topic​

The World Assembly,

Concerned with the high likelihood of transmitting communicable disease through the reuse of inadequately sterilized syringes;

Aware that higher disease transmission rates in any nation place the international community at risk of an outbreak, especially when they result from unsafe treatment;

Acknowledging that previous healthcare legislation has neglected to address the incredible importance of safe syringe use;

Hereby,

1. Directs the Epidemic and Pandemic Alert and Response Center to develop international standards to
   • utilize new, sterile syringes in place of used syringes when possible OR
   • adequately disinfect used syringes for reuse;
   • safely discard syringes that are no longer safe to reuse;
   • determine when a syringe is no longer safe to use and therefore must be discarded;
2. Mandates that all healthcare organizations and medical personnel follow these international standards or utilize new, sterile syringes when treating or preventing disease with the use of syringes;
   
   
3. Charges healthcare organizations with training any medical personnel who treat disease on proper syringe usage and disposal in accordance with this resolution and retrain them should EPARC substantively change the noted international standards.

Click to expand...

• Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
• Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
• Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
• Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.

This will likely be going to vote at major. I do have one major concern with the proposal, and that's the inclusion of 'or' in 1(a). While it's a fine proposal even with the inclusion of the 'or,' I can't help but feel that the word does add confusion to the proposal. Is it 1(a) or 1(b), with the mandatory enforcement of 1(c) and 1(d)? Or is it either 1(a) or 1(b), 1(c), and 1(d)? My intuition is to say the latter, in which case no standards would be in place for the discarding of used syringes. This could be very problematic, especially with the wording of 'when possible' in 1(a)

Regardless of how you read it with the inclusion of the 'or,' there's some vital part of the standard missing. It would be entirely complete if the 'or' wasn't there, but, unfortunately, I haven't done a thorough check of the proposal in several weeks. Even if we ignore the incompleteness of the standards provided, there's still the issue that it only requires standards to be made for either 1(a) or 1(b) (c) and (d), assuming my interpretation is correct. It doesn't make it so nations only need follow certain standards, it rather only makes it so that EPARC need create a standard for either one of those, if that makes any sense.

Another issue, albeit less troublesome, is the use of 'EPARC' without any aforementioned definition of it. Ideally, you should've done 'Directs the Epidemic and Pandemic Alert and Response Center (henceforth known as EPARC) to develop international standards to...', but that's a small problem that probably won't trip anyone up. Just, less than ideal, that's all.

Click to expand...

Morover:

Against.

Click to expand...

Gorundu:

I think the idea is that you either don't reuse syringes, in which case there is no need to standards on reusing syringes, or you reuse them and have standards for doing so.

Click to expand...

Morover:

I figured that was the intent, but because of the phrasing 'when possible' in 1(a), it makes it so there's a rather large loophole in the text of the proposal.

And there still stands the issue of the phrasing making it so EPARC only creates standards for one or the other, as opposed to making it so that member-nations only need to follow one or the other. I can certainly see why the author did what they did, but it detracts from the overall quality of the proposal. It's not strictly a dealbreaker for me, but its enough to make me lean slightly against the proposal.

Click to expand...

Sultan of The Netheregion:

For. It's clear that this will improve overall patient safety. However, the term 'syringe' used throughout, technically refers only to the plastic pump/measurement part of a device. This part can be reused if sterilised correctly, with extremely low risk of cross-contamination. It is the 'needle' that delivers the vaccine and thus it is the needle which should be single-use.

Click to expand...

Ensuring Safe Syringe Use was passed 13,592 votes to 2,041.

Click to expand...