Vaccine Distribution During a Pandemic Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda®
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic poses an enormous challenge to society, placing a burden on the health care system and presenting a number of issues to health care professionals globally. The scarcity of resources needed to overcome the virus outbreak implies that it is impossible to treat everyone equally (Spike & Lunstroth, 2016). As a result, governments and medical personnel face ethical problems. It is necessary to distribute vaccines in the most efficient way to maximize the benefits and eliminate the harm to the population. According to Savulescu et al. (2020), “a failure to carefully consider the consequences of actions could lead to massive preventable loss of life” (p. 620). Therefore, the federal task force must examine the best approach to the coronavirus vaccine distribution during the ongoing pandemic. The purpose of this statement is to address other members of the task force to explore the principle of social worth and discuss who should be given priority when distributing vaccinations during a pandemic.

Vaccine Priority Groups during a Pandemic

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that aims to achieve the overall good for society through appropriate actions and resource distribution. As stated by Savulescu et al. (2020), “one utilitarian rule of thumb is to save the greatest number (other things being equal)” (p. 623). According to this principle, people involved in public health care and safety should be vaccinated first because they can benefit others and contribute to the overall good. In particular, first responders such as medical workers, the police, and soldiers are essential to the functioning of society, and their vaccination must be a priority.

Following the utilitarian principle of minimizing harm, the next group should be the elderly due to their vulnerability and fatal risks of COVID-19. Similarly, people with comorbidities who are at a higher risk of complications should also be prioritized. Other vulnerable populations such as institutionalized people and individuals facing social exclusion must follow. The next group includes essential workers involved in education, transportation, and the food industry (Williams et al., 2021). Finally, adults over 55 constitute the next priority group, followed by the general population.

Such an approach to vaccine allocation benefits both the priority groups and the general population. The utilitarian principle can reduce severe cases and deaths in vulnerable populations, achieving the goal of reducing harm. Furthermore, frontline workers are provided with the necessary protection while facing significant risks (Williams et al., 2021). Their functionality is critical to the rest of the population who require health care and safety services. At the same time, non-priority citizens are still at risk of getting COVID-19 and suffering from consequences ranging from mild to fatal, which presents harm to this population. The burdens associated with this allocation decision will primarily affect the health care system and workers responsible for the timely vaccine administration.

The Principle of Social Worth

The concept of social worth is part of the utilitarian ethical theory. CDC (2021) reports the following moral justification for decision-making, as determined by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP): benefit maximization, harm minimization, health inequities mitigation, and justice and transparency promotion. The COVID-19 pandemic’s circumstances require governments to follow this priority to achieve the overall good. In particular, if health workers and people at greatest risk are not prioritized in vaccine distribution, a health care system collapse is likely to occur, with tremendous consequences to society as a whole.

Undoubtedly, there are dangers associated with this vaccine distribution policy. As reported by Williams et al. (2021), “planning how to distribute vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 is even harder because we understand relatively little about the virus, transmission, and its immunological impact in the short and long term” (p. 994). Furthermore, a utilitarian approach inevitably disadvantages certain population groups who are not prioritized. Low-income countries are historically disadvantaged by the principle of social worth and vaccine prioritization. The WHO (2021) reports that COVID-19 vaccine inequality harms fragile health care systems in developing countries while “richer countries have paid trillions in stimulus to prop up flagging economies” (para. 2). In addition, abuses of authority have already been reported, such as nursing home management providing their friends with vaccines (Boyd, 2021). Such situations must be acknowledged and prevented to ensure the maximum possible equality in such a challenging position.

Different professions’ advocacy for other principles can present another challenge to the proposed vaccine allocation. While it is rarely argued that health care workers should not be prioritized, there is an ethical issue of vaccine administration for non-priority occupations. For example, market, retail, manufacturing, and hospitality sector workers are affected by the inequality in health and social protection, as well as losses of working hours and jobs.

Conclusion

To conclude, the principle of social worth applied to vaccine distribution is based on utilitarianism, which refers to an ethical theory prioritizing the overall good for society. According to this approach, it is essential to vaccinate frontline workers and vulnerable populations to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic. At the same time, one must be aware of the associated dangers, such as abuse of power and vaccine inequality among countries.

References

Boyd, A. (2021). ‘They abused their authority.’ Nurse says COVID-19 vaccines given to friends of nursing home management. The Star. Web.

CDC. (2021). How CDC is making vaccine recommendations. Web.

Savulescu, J., Persson, I., & Wilkinson, D. (2020). Bioethics, 34(6), 620-632. Web.

Spike, J. P., & Lunstroth, R. (2016). A casebook in interprofessional ethics: A succinct introduction to ethics for the health professions. Springer.

WHO. (2021). Vaccine inequity undermining global economic recovery. Web.

Williams, J., Degeling, C., McVernon, J., & Dawson, A. (2021). Vaccine, 39(6), 994-999. Web.

Print
More related papers
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, December 17). Vaccine Distribution During a Pandemic. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccine-distribution-during-a-pandemic/

Work Cited

"Vaccine Distribution During a Pandemic." IvyPanda, 17 Dec. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/vaccine-distribution-during-a-pandemic/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'Vaccine Distribution During a Pandemic'. 17 December.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "Vaccine Distribution During a Pandemic." December 17, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccine-distribution-during-a-pandemic/.

1. IvyPanda. "Vaccine Distribution During a Pandemic." December 17, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccine-distribution-during-a-pandemic/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Vaccine Distribution During a Pandemic." December 17, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccine-distribution-during-a-pandemic/.

Powered by CiteTotal, the best bibliography maker
If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
Cite
Print
1 / 1