No one is immune to the coronavirus, but some of us are more susceptible to infection. And unless we have policies that take care of every one of us, we all remain in danger.

One of the important lessons emerging from the current pandemic is that the health of every member of society is linked to everyone else. From street vendors to corporate executives, there’s a consensus that we’re all in this crisis together.

But also emerging is a narrative that the virus is a “great equalizer,” one that doesn’t discriminate between those who are poor or rich, or between racial groups.

The coronavirus pandemic is not an equalizer, neither in terms of who will get sick, nor by a measure of who will receive the care they need to recover, especially in the United States where millions of people have no health insurance, and where millions more are at risk of losing their coverage because they’ve lost their jobs as a result of the crisis.

Those who are more likely to be infected are people we’ve deemed “essential” to continue working, such as grocery store workers who come in contact with hundreds of people per day yet earn meager wages. The more privileged can work from home, or even take time off work to wait out the crisis in their vacation homes and are more likely to be tested and treated.

We are already seeing cases concentrated in areas that have been traditionally neglected, including black, brown and immigrant neighborhoods, Indian reservations and rural communities without adequate hospitals and clinics.

john a. powell 

But the crisis is not a contest over who is most vulnerable. To focus exclusively on the most at-risk groups and neglect everyone else misses the point. Everyone is affected by the coronavirus, but in dramatically different ways.

The response to this crisis must therefore take an approach in the form of targeted universalism. This approach accounts for nuances of how different groups are being affected by the pandemic to create policy that targets each group based on their particular needs, while also remembering that we’re all in this together.

How do we do this?

We begin by setting an achievable, universal goal that ensures that every person who gets sick is treated, regardless of their wealth, healthcare coverage or citizenship status.

We should then assess where the general population is situated in relation to our universal goal. What percentage of people who are infected with the coronavirus and require hospitalization or treatment are receiving it? After we have a general picture of the problem, we need to understand the disparities between groups.

The next step is to understand the reasons for the gaps between groups in terms of infection rates and care, and the barriers faced by all groups in achieving the universal goal.

For urban poor that may be lack of health coverage. For rural people with health coverage, that may be due to a lack of healthcare facilities. For undocumented immigrants, that may be both of those reasons in addition to fear that seeking treatment may result in detention and deportation. People with disabilities, those who are homeless and incarcerated people experience other layers of challenges.

And, finally, we need to develop tailored strategies to respond to the unique impediments faced by each group as part of the larger policy that moves the whole of society towards our universal goal. One vehicle to achieve this can be crafting the government’s next stimulus package so that it prioritizes the health of individuals over the profits of corporations.

It is not inconceivable, especially in this exceptional moment of unprecedented government measures and social solidarity, that such a law could be passed which makes treatment free for all, provides support to rural and hard-to-reach populations, guarantees treatment without risk of detention for undocumented people, and addresses other barriers to care which would otherwise prolong this crisis for everyone.

john a. powell is a professor of law and the director of the Othering & Belonging Institute at UC Berkeley.