Philosophy In Action All the ideas and discussions
26 votes Vote

Should the government mandate vaccination?

Advocates of free markets often disagree about whether vaccines are safe, effective, and necessary -- and whether they could be justly mandated by law. One problem is that the refusal to vaccinate oneself might put others at risk. Not everyone can be vaccinated, and some people who are vaccinated don't develop immunity. However, when the vast majority of people are vaccinated, that provides "herd immunity" to people who don't have immunity. People who choose not to be vaccinated degrade that herd immunity and thereby put others at risk. Moreover, parents have to choose whether to vaccinate their children or not, and the failure to vaccinate is regarded as neglect by many people -- on par with Christian Science parents refusing to give a sick child antibiotics. Given that, should vaccinations be mandated by the government? If so, under what circumstances? Or might people be held civilly liable for transmitting diseases? Or should vaccination be considered a purely private matter between individuals (and institutions)?

legendre007, 27.03.2014, 19:59
Idea status: completed

Comments

DianaHsieh, 02.04.2014, 18:39
Thanks for the timely question! I edited it quite a bit, as I think that the summary of herd immunity here is either unclear or inaccurate. Also, I wanted to introduce the pesky problem of children! :-)

Let me know if you want anything changed. Here's the original version:

Can mandatory-vaccination laws be justified on individual-rights grounds?

I have friends in the free-market movement on both sides of the debate on whether vaccines are safe, effective, and necessary. The pro-vaccination side often brings up a principle called "herd immunity," which says that a vaccine's ability to protect a single person is often contingent upon everyone else being vaccinated as well. In this theory, if only 10 percent of a population is vaccinated, a dangerous pathogen easily could kill the entire population, even the 10 percent who were vaccinated. By contrast, if 99 percent of the population is vaccinated, the whole population is protected, even the 1 percent that avoided vaccination. Thus, says the pro-vaccine side, it's not sufficient to say "You're protected as an individual if you're vaccinated and vulnerable if you're not"; the effectiveness of your being vaccinated is incumbent upon everyone else being vaccinated, too. Many pro-vaccine people, who are otherwise laissez-faire, say that the government should therefore enforce laws mandating everyone to be vaccinated.

I agree with the pro-vaccine side on science, and believe the principle of herd immunity to be valid. But I'm troubled by the call for mandatory vaccination. I think it would make more sense to refrain from coercion but to allow individuals to be held civilly liable for transmitting pathogens. If I refuse to have my children vaccinated and, consequently, my children contract a pathogen and transmit it to your children, then my household has accidentally initiated force on your household, just as if I accidentally hit you with my car. In that case, you would be able to sue me for harm done. That civil liability would incentivize me to have my household vaccinated even though it doesn't coerce me. I think that makes sense.

If the pro-vaccine side is right about herd immunity, would that justify laws mandating that everyone be vaccinated? Are there rational alternatives to mandatory vaccination?
Ragnar Weskar, 22.04.2014, 13:27
Government under any circumstances should never force a person to get vaccinated. The reasons are that it is a person's responsibility to protect their own health,under a laissez-faire economy healthcare would be affordable to most employed people aside from private charity, and spreading misinformation-propaganda about vaccinations would be a rare occurrence. It would be a rare occurrence under laissez-faire system because it would be in the rational self-interest of of doctors or healthcare personnel to provide the facts about vaccinations to their patients in order to profit from them through mutually agreed low cost services.

Leave a comment