Staed et al. conducted a qualitative study to assess the validity of making it mandatory to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and having vaccine passports in Britain’s adult population. The researchers based their arguments on the measures that the British government was taking to ensure maximum vaccine uptake to reduce the pandemic’s adversities. They noted the ongoing debate on whether the mandate for COVID-19 vaccination was valid and the impacts on populations against it.
To assess public views on the vaccination and vaccine passports mandate, Staed et al. conducted qualitative telephone interviews with adults. Purposeful sampling was done, and 50 respondents were selected. Thematic analysis of the collected data revealed that a section of those who supported government efforts supported the mandate. However, those who oppose vaccination argued strongly against the mandates and vaccine passports. Concerns about freedom of choice, social divisiveness, and state coercion emerged from those supporting the mandate. The authors concluded that debates about vaccine passports and vaccine mandates should be approached carefully by policymakers because of the emotions that emerge from the topic.
Vaccination and policies surrounding health intervention are widely researched topics. Existing literature shows that governments have adopted mandatory vaccination against specific diseases based on their impacts on the public. The selected study will be a crucial addition to existing literature that discusses the issue of vaccination and public policies. The researchers used many resources to support the basis of conducting the study. Every study should have a strong foundation upon which the researcher shows the relevance of what is being examined. Using several sources to support the study enhances its credibility as a reliable source for use when discussing this topic. Each step in the methodology section is chronologically presented and can be replicated by other researchers who want to prove the validity and accuracy of the outcomes acquired in this study. The study’s limitations are the use of a small sample population to represent the opinions of the British regarding the vaccination mandate and vaccine passports. The small sample size implies that the study’s outcomes will require verification before they can be considered the true representation of the public’s opinion.
I am interested in determining the public’s perceptions and attitudes toward mandatory vaccination. The issue has been debated and researched widely by researchers with various objectives. Interest in the topic emerges from the fact that the recent measures imposed are part of the various government efforts to ensure public safety. However, the adoption of such mandates usually disregards the opinions of the public, especially those who are against or oppose mandatory participation. The study applies to my research interest by providing insight into public opinion regarding government decisions to adopt mandatory vaccination. The researchers’ literature section will be a crucial resource in informing my area of study by identifying some vital sources that will help further my understanding of the issue. The method used in this study applies to my research interest by providing a proven method to examine the issue. The clarity in the methodology section allows me to replicate the method in my research and a have a guarantee of acquiring reliable results. The source will help to guide my future research on the topic by being a foundational source for the issue of concern and identifying the crucial areas that should be addressed.
Reference
Stead, M., Ford, A., Eadie, D., Biggs, H., Elliott, C., Ussher, M., Bedford, H., Angus, K., Hunt, K., MacKintosh, A. M., Jessop, C., & MacGregor, A. (2022). A “step too far” or “Perfect sense?” A qualitative study of British adults’ views on mandating COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine passports. Vaccine. Web.