Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk?
Mandatory vaccination, including for COVID-19, can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are prop...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
| _version_ | 1826259112341536768 |
|---|---|
| author | Savulescu, J |
| author_facet | Savulescu, J |
| author_sort | Savulescu, J |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Mandatory vaccination, including for COVID-19, can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate. I describe an algorithm for justified mandatory vaccination. Penalties or costs could include withholding of benefits, imposition of fines, provision of community service or loss of freedoms. I argue that under conditions of risk or perceived risk of a novel vaccination, a system of payment for risk in vaccination may be superior. I defend a payment model against various objections, including that it constitutes coercion and undermines solidarity. I argue that payment can be in cash or in kind, and opportunity for altruistic vaccinations can be preserved by offering people vaccinated the opportunity to donate any cash payment back to the health service. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T18:44:43Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:0e1d69cb-6449-422e-b0c1-33daf8b23283 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T18:44:43Z |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:0e1d69cb-6449-422e-b0c1-33daf8b232832022-03-26T09:44:10ZGood reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk?Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:0e1d69cb-6449-422e-b0c1-33daf8b23283EnglishSymplectic ElementsBMJ Publishing Group2020Savulescu, JMandatory vaccination, including for COVID-19, can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate. I describe an algorithm for justified mandatory vaccination. Penalties or costs could include withholding of benefits, imposition of fines, provision of community service or loss of freedoms. I argue that under conditions of risk or perceived risk of a novel vaccination, a system of payment for risk in vaccination may be superior. I defend a payment model against various objections, including that it constitutes coercion and undermines solidarity. I argue that payment can be in cash or in kind, and opportunity for altruistic vaccinations can be preserved by offering people vaccinated the opportunity to donate any cash payment back to the health service. |
| spellingShingle | Savulescu, J Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk? |
| title | Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk? |
| title_full | Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk? |
| title_fullStr | Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk? |
| title_short | Good reasons to vaccinate: Mandatory or payment for risk? |
| title_sort | good reasons to vaccinate mandatory or payment for risk |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT savulescuj goodreasonstovaccinatemandatoryorpaymentforrisk |