Right to health and allocation of health resources. What has been learned from covid-19 pandemic? A comparison of the evolution of health-care regulations in the United States, India, and European Union

The paper deals with the problem related to the scarcity of hospital medical resources in intensive care caused by Covid-19 pandemic, and analyzes the right to health as expressed in International Human Rights Law, comparing the government responses in the United States, India, and the European Union. The purpose of this essay is to demonstrate how governments reacted in the early phases of the emergency and to how they are preparing for the future. The issue is particularly challenging in terms of human rights law and the principle of non-discrimination, since there have been cases where the recommendations seemed to be profoundly hurtful to patients suffering from severe diseases and disabilities. Although the ideals of fairness, equity, and solidarity should be observed in the fair allocation of scarce medical resources, the guidelines that doctors were required to follow sometimes chose to employ also criteria as the “higher life expectancy.”As a result, it’s critical to look at how governments are attempting to prevent future ethical problems by defining clear norms and, more importantly, investing in new infrastructure or regulations. What lessons have Europe, India, and the United States learned from this experience, and how are they addressing, or intend to address, the issue of medical resource distribution to avoid catastrophes like the one that occurred?.