Practical Philosophy, University of Helsinki, PL 24, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Med Health Care Philos. 2022 Mar;25(1):3-9. doi: 10.1007/s11019-021-10055-y. Epub 2021 Oct 30.
In bioethics vaccine refusal is often discussed as an instance of free riding on the herd immunity of an infectious disease. However, the social science of vaccine refusal suggests that the reasoning behind refusal to vaccinate more often stems from previous negative experiences in healthcare practice as well as deeply felt distrust of healthcare institutions. Moreover, vaccine refusal often acts like an exit mechanism. Whilst free riding is often met with sanctions, exit, according to Albert Hirschman's theory of exit and voice is most efficiently met by addressing concerns and increasing the quality and number of feedback channels. If the legitimate grievances responsible for vaccine refusal are not heard or addressed by healthcare policy, further polarization of attitudes to vaccines is likely to ensue. Thus, there is a need in the bioethics of vaccine refusal to understand the diverse ethical questions of this inflammable issue in addition to those of individual responsibility to vaccinate.
在生物伦理学中,疫苗抵制常被视为在传染病的群体免疫中搭便车的一种表现。然而,疫苗抵制的社会科学研究表明,人们抵制接种疫苗的原因更多地源于之前在医疗保健实践中的负面经历,以及对医疗机构的深深不信任。此外,疫苗抵制往往充当着一种退出机制。虽然搭便车行为通常会受到制裁,但根据阿尔伯特·赫希曼(Albert Hirschman)的退出和发言权理论,退出的最佳方式是解决问题,增加反馈渠道的质量和数量。如果医疗保健政策没有听到或解决导致疫苗抵制的合理不满,那么人们对疫苗的态度可能会进一步两极化。因此,在疫苗抵制的生物伦理学中,除了个人接种疫苗的责任问题之外,还需要理解这个易燃问题的各种伦理问题。