Introduction
Immunization, particularly neonatal vaccination, is now regarded as the best public health achievement the government can achieve through its health sector. In general, vaccination is the injection of a dead or attenuated disease organism into the body of a healthy individual to stimulate the creation of protein antigens. According to Silcock et al. (2020), protein antigens are bodily defense mechanisms that combat diseases upon their introduction into the human body. Vaccination of a country’s population is thus only intended to protect residents from potentially fatal illnesses caused by the ever-present viruses, bacteria, fungi, and parasites.
Despite its benefits, childhood vaccination has not reached many people because the globe is divided on the issue. According to Chang (2018), countries that have adopted well-established immunization programs have lower rates of infectious diseases and have managed to prevent diseases such as polio, diphtheria, measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), which, if left uncontrolled, result in death and permanent disability in children. Recent studies have found that two distinct views exist as far as children’s immunization is concerned. According to Chang (2018), many people worldwide are against children’s vaccination, and some are against it being mandatory. Vaccine safety issues, however, remain the biggest debate that steers many uninformed mothers to hesitate to allow their children to get immunized as programmed by the state (Qian et al., 2020). This study argues that childhood immunization should be mandatory in Australia by analyzing bioethical principles and theories of autonomy, beneficence, justice, and non – non-maleficence.
Bioethical Principles
Giving care or medicine to patients necessitates the practicing physician or care provider making good and sober decisions while considering predefined norms and codes and the patient’s needs and preferences. This entails selecting an acceptable drug or intervention for patients and considering other elements, such as pharmaceutical flaws or decisions made on human beings. Furthermore, practitioners must tell their customers about the operation they are performing to explain to patients why they are taking such drugs (Gielen, 2020). Therefore, analyzing the four bioethical principles regarding childhood immunization will prove why children’s immunization should be mandatory in Australia by citing its benefits over the alleged side effects. The four bioethical principles are described below.
Respect for Autonomy
This is one of the bioethical principles that must now be addressed when determining the optimal treatment for patients. However, respect for autonomy in clinical ethics implies that individual patients or family members have the freedom to select what is best for them or their children based on their values (Rus & Groselj, 2021). This holds patients accountable for the result of the selected intervention. According to Rahn et al. (2020), respect for autonomy during medical treatment should be balanced with other values that consider social duties and communal well-being. Since informed consent or refusal is utilized to exercise autonomy during treatment or kid immunization, four factors are employed to evaluate legitimacy while choosing on childhood vaccine.
These terms allude to patients’ decision-making competence, proper disclosure of information that allows patients to make independent decisions, and voluntariness (Rahn et al., 2020). Because children at this age lack permission or cannot make decisions for themselves, their parent’s decision to immunize them is critical in this case. In terms of immunization, nurses must recognize their parents’ autonomy. Although not all parents agree that their children should be inoculated, Gianfredi et al. (2019) discovered that vaccination hesitation among parents is mainly caused by a lack of sufficient or relevant information. Other studies have linked misunderstanding and manipulation as additional variables that impede parents from embracing their children’s vaccines.
Non-maleficence
This bioethical concept requires that the physician or the intervention selected provide no risk to the receiver. According to O’Donoghue (2022), non-maleficence is the most important principle in clinical ethics. The idea demands that practitioners first assess the selected intervention’s potential side effects or impact on specific patients. The administration of the service will be allowed only if the advantages outweigh the possible negative effects. O’Donoghue (2022) discovered that childhood vaccination is crucial for a country since it helps babies develop antibodies against severe illnesses such as tetanus, diphtheria, mumps, and measles, among others. Other studies have found that infant immune systems are not fully developed, making them vulnerable to infections that, in many cases, result in irreversible injury or death. As a result, the study indicated that children vaccinating children is an important practice in establishing a healthy nation. Children’s vaccination, according to Zhang et al. (2021), is a minimally intrusive and safe method based on the idea of non-maleficence. However, vaccines are not fully risk-free; therefore, practitioners must examine additional elements such as adverse events, contraindications for vaccination, and vaccine development to ensure their safety.
Beneficence
This is a bioethical concept that outlines healthcare practitioners’ core functions. According to Zhang et al. (2021), healthcare practitioners must contribute to their patient’s well-being. The concept of goodwill urges all clinicians to use treatments or procedures they are most familiar with. Normally, beneficence is seen as an improvement over non-maleficence because the principle requires caregivers to select positive techniques in assisting or benefiting their customers. According to O’Donoghue (2022), beneficence characterizes people’s trust in the healthcare system and is essential for a constructive patient-physician connection, improving children’s vaccination efficiency. Other studies have indicated that caregivers must consider not just the individual’s health but also the health of society as a whole by building herd immunity. According to O’Donoghue (2022), the vaccination of children is critical for a country because herd immunity aids in reducing and eliminating illnesses. Other studies have found that the advantages of vaccination exceed the risks.
Justice
In actual life, the principle of justice is characterized by equitability and distributive justice. According to O’Donoghue (2022), equitability indicates that all individuals should be treated equally regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or socioeconomic class. On the other hand, distributive justice suggests that healthcare resources, such as pharmaceuticals, vaccines, and human resources, must be spread equally throughout the country for simple access. The essence of justice in public health, particularly in childhood vaccination, is subjecting equal preventative measures and fair distribution of the resources necessary for infectious disease prevention. According to Zhang et al. (2021), community herd immunity may demand a mandated vaccination strategy to prevent infectious illnesses. Furthermore, according to some research, newborns have the right to be safeguarded from infectious illnesses and infections that might result in their deaths or lasting damage. Zhang et al. (2021) cite polio as an irreparable handicap a nation may face without an effective vaccination program. When examining the justice principle, caregivers must define herd immunity as a collective benefit, the state’s role and policies in protecting the health of its population, and the ethical justification of mandatory medical procedures.
Discussion
From the ongoing discussion on bioethical principles, misinformation and lack of reliable information is one reason for an increased number of parents worldwide refusing to adhere to immunization programs. According to MacDonald et al. (2018), parents need to be informed of the benefits of children’s immunization and the health risks that could occur when kids are not immunized. Other studies on vaccine hesitancy reveal that many parents refuse to vaccinate their children due to baseless misinformation that vaccination leads to other conditions, such as autism and other developmental disorders (Isaacs, 2020). As such, care providers need to determine whether parents who refuse to vaccinate their children decide on sober minds or if their decision is based on misinformation or a controlling influence emanating from uninformed masses. The Australian government, through relevant departments, therefore, should adopt effective strategies such as motivational interviewing to inform the parents of the importance of childhood immunizations and the risks associated with refusing to vaccinate newborn babies (Danchin & Buttery, 2021). With the need to protect the entire population from infectious diseases, the Australian government needs to make children immunization mandatory for all newborn babies.
Beneficence and non-maleficence require that care providers consider contraindications or precautions that may arise from children’s vaccination. According to Danchin and Buttery (2021), a caregiver must protect young children from dangerous infections that have been proven to cost their lives or cause irreversible damage. Moreover, immunization creates herd immunity, which, thus, protects other children and the entire community from infectious diseases. Isaacs (2020) explains that there is a high probability of the currently diminishing diseases, such as MMR, reappearing.
The government across the world needs to make children’s immunization mandatory to prevent such occurrences, which may lead to massive children’s deaths or disabilities. Considering the benefits of vaccination to its mild adverse effects, the Australian government needs to make childhood immunization mandatory to save and protect its citizens from dangerous infectious diseases. With the justice principle, herd immunity and protection of the vulnerable in the community is necessary, and thus, counters the principle of respect for parents’ autonomy (Isaacs, 2020). This means that the concept of vaccination should be explained to mothers and encouraged to consider the fair burden of the practices and the need to protect others. Therefore, the argument supports the earlier stand that childhood vaccination should be mandatory in Australia.
Conclusion
After considering the bioethical principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice, it is clear that childhood vaccination is a very important practice in a country. It has been found that vaccination helps a country establish herd immunity which, in the long run, protects everyone in the community from infectious infections such as polio, diphtheria, and the MMR. Moreover, children’s vaccination has many long-term benefits compared to mild adverse effects cited by many parents. Childhood immunization triggers the human body to produce antigens, a defense mechanism for fighting pathogens. Other mild effects of vaccination, as cited by parents, include fever and swelling of injected arms. Therefore, basing the arguments on the long-term benefits of children’s vaccination over its alleged side effects, the Australian government needs to make it mandatory to protect young children regardless of their parents will. This is justifiable because immunization makes children resilient to infections such as tetanus, MMR, hepatitis, and polio, among other communicable diseases, which, if left unchecked, lead to death or irreversible conditions.
References
Chang, L. V. (2018). Information, education, and health behaviors: Evidence from the MMR vaccine-autism controversy. Health Economics, 27(7), 1043–1062. Web.
Danchin, M., & Buttery, J. (2021). COVID ‐19 vaccine hesitancy: A unique set of challenges. Internal Medicine Journal, 51(12). Web.
Gianfredi, V., Moretti, M., & Lopalco, P. L. (2019). Countering vaccine hesitancy through immunization information systems, a narrative review. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics. Web.
Gielen, J. (2020). Dealing with Bioethical Issues in a Globalized World. Advancing Global Bioethics. Springer International Publishing. Web.
Isaacs, D. (2020). What history teaches us about vaccines and pandemics. Microbiology Australia. Web.
MacDonald, N. E., Harmon, S., Dube, E., Steenbeek, A., Crowcroft, N., Opel, D. J., Faour, D., Leask, J., & Butler, R. (2018). Mandatory infant & childhood immunization: Rationales, issues, and knowledge gaps. Vaccine, 36(39), 5811–5818. Web.
O’Donoghue, K. (2022). Learning analytics within higher education: Autonomy, Beneficence, and Non-maleficence. Journal of Academic Ethics. Web.
Qian, M., Chou, S.-Y., & Lai, E. K. (2020). Confirmatory bias in health decisions: Evidence from the MMR-autism controversy. Journal of Health Economics, p. 70, 102284. Web.
Rahn, A. C., Solari, A., Beckerman, H., Nicholas, R., Wilkie, D., Heesen, C., & Giordano, A. (2020). “I Will Respect the Autonomy of My Patient.” International Journal of MS Care, 22(6), 285–293. Web.
Rus, M., & Groselj, U. (2021). Ethics of vaccination in childhood—A framework based on the four principles of biomedical ethics. Vaccines, 9(2), 113. Web.
Silcock, R., Crawford, N. W., Selvaraj, G., McMinn, A., Danchin, M., Lazzaro, T., & Perrett, K. P. (2020). Subcutaneous nodules following immunization in children; in Victoria, Australia, from 2007 to 2016. Vaccine, 38(15), 3169–3177. Web.
Zhang, H., Wang, Y., Zhang, Z., Guan, F., Zhang, H., & Guo, Z. (2021). Artificial intelligence, social media, and suicide prevention: Principle of beneficence besides respect for autonomy. The American Journal of Bioethics, 21(7), 43–45. Web.