California Western School of Law in San Diego, CA.
Am J Law Med. 2022 Mar;48(1):54-90. doi: 10.1017/amj.2022.13.
This Article tackles the critical problem of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and provides a normative framework for legal policies to address such hesitancy in the ongoing pandemic. The foundation of this Article rests in decision-making theories that allow policymakers to understand individual misperception of risk as compared to evidence-based assessment of risk. Vaccine-hesitant individuals assign a high risk to the COVID-19 vaccine and a low risk to the disease-a perception that is disconnected from the science. The backbone of this Article is the timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic and the underlying science of the disease and vaccines. The timeline provides a factual background to demonstrate how vaccine hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccine emerged. The instant pandemic also demonstrates changes in how individuals see themselves in society, receive information, and are persuaded by economic forces. This Article combines the individual's decision-making process with modern day variables to suggest interventions that can undo anti-vaccine damage. While the novelty of the normative framework provided herein is instructive for current COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy issues, this framework can be applied to other areas in which individual's perceptions of risk are disconnected from evidence-based assessment of risk.
本文探讨了 COVID-19 疫苗犹豫这一关键问题，并为解决当前大流行期间的这种犹豫提供了一个法律政策的规范框架。本文的基础是决策理论，使政策制定者能够理解个人对风险的误解与基于证据的风险评估相比。对 COVID-19 疫苗持犹豫态度的个人将疫苗的风险评估得很高，而将疾病的风险评估得很低——这种认知与科学脱节。本文的核心是 COVID-19 大流行的时间线和疾病及疫苗的潜在科学。时间线提供了一个事实背景，以展示对 COVID-19 疫苗的犹豫是如何出现的。这场即时大流行还表明，个人如何看待自己在社会中的地位、接收信息以及受到经济力量的影响发生了变化。本文将个人的决策过程与现代变量相结合，提出了可以消除反疫苗损害的干预措施。虽然本文提供的规范框架的新颖性对当前 COVID-19 疫苗犹豫问题具有指导意义，但该框架也可以应用于其他领域，在这些领域中，个人对风险的认知与基于证据的风险评估脱节。
