Support for Mandatory Vaccination
Pro: Giannouchos, T. V., Steletou, E., Saridi, M., & Souliotis, K. (2021). Mandatory vaccination support and intentions to get vaccinated for COVID‐19: Results from a nationally representative general population survey in October 2020 in Greece. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice.
The authors present their views on the Greek population regarding their support for mandatory vaccination. Unlike other jurisdictions where there is intense opposition to forced vaccination against COVID-19, in Greece, there is 74% support for a forced inoculation of the COVID-19 vaccine (Giannouchos et al., 2021). Additionally, there is increased trust in governmental services including healthcare vaccination activities across the country. The authors suggest that there are opportunities to increase the proportion of the population that supports obligatory vaccination. They include having more community outreach initiatives that seek to convince people on a larger scale.
Con: Graeber, D., Schmidt-Petri, C., & Schröder, C. (2021). Attitudes on voluntary and mandatory vaccination against COVID-19: Evidence from Germany. PloS one, 16(5), e0248372.
In the article, the authors give their verdict on the popularity of compulsory vaccination drives. Notably, they recognize the need to achieve herd immunity through practices other than mandatory vaccination. They argue that even though there is a lower approval rate for mandatory vaccination, it does not mean that it is difficult to draw public benefit from vaccination. The other way of attaining herd immunity includes the encouragement of voluntary vaccination (Graeber et al., 2021). Additionally, they encourage policymakers to consider doing proper research to find out the common factors that can make people dissent vaccines.
Morality
Pro: Giubilini, A. (2021). Vaccination ethics. British Medical Bulletin, 137(1), 4-12.
The author of the article states the presence of a moral obligation to undergo mandatory vaccination. The author describes obligatory vaccination initiatives as coercive measures that are necessary in times of emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. According to Giubilini (2021), people have a moral obligation to heed the directions of coercive vaccination exercises because the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. The author highlights the need to prioritize public benefit over individual concerns. Giubilini draws his assertions from the historical vaccination data of other diseases like measles. He notes that when a country lacks coercion tactics for vaccination, the uptake is lower, and thus the chances of an outbreak are higher.
Con: Vickers, A. (2019). Why vaccination is unethical and immoral. Stuff. Web.
The author recognizes and supports the different European codes that protect people from a medical intervention that they are unwilling to undergo. Therefore, the author is against mandatory vaccination and cites the need for the government to respect people’s right to informed consent. The author alleges that there is no “greater good” in protecting the “greater majority” and in the process, ignore and walk over people’s rights (Vickers, 2019 para. 2). According to Vickers (2019), there is a moral obligation for state institutions to consider coercion as immorality that risks accelerating the approval of policies that affect human rights.
Public Benefit
Pro: Rasheed, Z. (2021). Should COVID-19 vaccines be mandatory? Aljazeera. Web.
The author alleges that there is a public benefit when there are policies for mandatory vaccination. According to Rasheed (2021), compulsory vaccination is justified since it protects the masses from harm by pandemics. He states that there is a stark difference between forced vaccination and fidelity to human rights. The right to informed consent for medical interventions is not “absolute” and thus governments across the world are free to interfere (Rasheed, 2021 para. 12). The governments can interfere because it is for the achievement of another valuable goal which is a public benefit.
Con: Bhargava, A. & Doshi, P. (2021). Vaccine mandates: a new form of ‘institutional segregation. The Baltimore Sun. Web.
The authors present their resentment against the practice of mandatory vaccination. Notably, they allege that forced vaccination has no benefits and instead divides society. According to Bhargave and Doshi (2021), there is no need to introduce other factors that profound the existing societal segregation. In their words, they believe that forced vaccination furthers segregation at workplaces leading to a new form of division which they refer to as “institutionalized segregation.” (Bhargava & Doshi para 2). Therefore, coerced vaccination has no public benefit and instead brings anger, mistrust, and privacy infringement.
References
Bhargava, A. & Doshi, P. (2021). Vaccine mandates: a new form of ‘institutional segregation. The Baltimore Sun. Web.
Giannouchos, T. V., Steletou, E., Saridi, M., & Souliotis, K. (2021). Mandatory vaccination support and intentions to get vaccinated for COVID‐19: Results from a nationally representative general population survey in October 2020 in Greece. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice.
Giubilini, A. (2021). Vaccination ethics. British Medical Bulletin, 137(1), 4-12.
Graeber, D., Schmidt-Petri, C., & Schröder, C. (2021). Attitudes on voluntary and mandatory vaccination against COVID-19: Evidence from Germany. PloS one, 16(5), e0248372.
Rasheed, Z. (2021). Should COVID-19 vaccines be mandatory? Aljazeera. Web.
Vickers, A. (2019). Why vaccination is unethical and immoral. Stuff. Web.