AMA J Ethics. 2020 Jan 1;22(1):E36-42. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2020.36.
When Are Vaccine Mandates Appropriate?
Author information
- 1
- The executive director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where she is also a lecturer on law at Harvard Law School.
- 2
- A professor of law and the James Edgar Hervey '50 Chair of Litigation at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, in San Francisco.
- 1
- The executive director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where she is also a lecturer on law at Harvard Law School.
- 2
- A professor of law and the James Edgar Hervey '50 Chair of Litigation at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, in San Francisco.
Abstract
Vaccine refusal is a serious public health problem, especially in the context of diseases with potential to spark global pandemics, such as Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This article examines whether and when compelling vaccination through mandates and criminalization, for example, are appropriate. It argues that some legal approaches are ethical when they preserve social stability, trust in government, therapeutic research opportunities, or when they diminish disease severity.
Vaccine refusal is a serious public health problem, especially in the context of diseases with potential to spark global pandemics, such as Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This article examines whether and when compelling vaccination through mandates and criminalization, for example, are appropriate. It argues that some legal approaches are ethical when they preserve social stability, trust in government, therapeutic research opportunities, or when they diminish disease severity.
No comments:
Post a Comment