**3. Conclusion**

This study has introduced theoretical reflections on the process of ethical deliberation in the allocation of beds and intensive care equipment, in the light of the Theory of Health Justice, the Accountability for Reasonableness approach and the principle of SUS equity, before the COVID-19 pandemic.

From the publications found, we observed that government, administrators and service providers have been mobilised to protect public health, making the most of limited resources and protecting the most vulnerable people and those who are institutionalised, in order to reduce damage to health systems, individuals and society. Even so, it is clear that it is impossible to meet the needs of the contingent of critically ill patients simultaneously.

As the crisis has evolved, generally speaking, nations have favoured public health policies that prioritise the greatest good for the greatest number of patients in allocating resources through reasonableness, adopting limits and constraints and government responsibility, thus enabling human rights-based health programming.

Regardless of the ethical support, if there is a scarcity of resources, there are many scenarios that will seem morally unsustainable, especially in the face of greater prognostic uncertainty. We should keep in mind the recognition that no screening protocol available will be perfect and that there may be a much better *Ethical Deliberation in the Allocation of Respirators and Beds during the Covid-19 Pandemic… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98589*

chance of approaching reasonable deliberations when adopting a proposal that seeks a good ethical and technical basis and that are open to public scrutiny and individualised reviews involving legal counsel and health system administrators and where decision making occurs in a shared way among the team and, whenever possible, with the patient. Responsibility, cooperation and preparedness are necessary attitudes at this critical time of COVID-19 pandemic.
