Department of Public Health Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Collegio Ca' della Paglia, Fondazione Ghislieri, Pavia, Italy.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023;12:7616. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2022.7616. Epub 2022 Dec 28.
The debate around vaccine mandates has flourished over the last decade, with several countries introducing or extending mandatory childhood vaccinations. In a recent study, Attwell and Hannah explore how functional and political pressures added to public health threats in selected countries, motivating governments to increase the coerciveness of their childhood vaccine regimes. In this commentary, we reflect on whether such model applies to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case and how the pandemic has re-shuffled the deck around vaccine mandates. We identify COVID-19 immunisation policies' distinctive aspects as we make the case of countries implementing mass immunisation programmes while relying on digital COVID-19 certificates as an indirect form of mandate to increase vaccine uptake. We conclude by acknowledging that different forms of mandatory vaccination might serve as a shortcut to protect population health in times of emergency, underlining, however, that the ultimate public health goal is to promote voluntary, informed, and responsible adherence to preventive behaviours.
围绕疫苗强制接种的争论在过去十年中愈演愈烈,一些国家已经开始或扩大儿童强制性疫苗接种。在最近的一项研究中,Attwell 和 Hannah 探讨了功能和政治压力如何在选定国家与公共卫生威胁交织在一起,促使政府增加儿童疫苗制度的强制性。在这篇评论中,我们反思了这种模式是否适用于 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的情况,以及大流行如何改变了疫苗强制接种的局面。我们在分析实施大规模免疫计划的国家的 COVID-19 免疫政策的独特方面时,认为依靠数字 COVID-19 证书作为增加疫苗接种率的间接强制形式是合理的。最后,我们承认在紧急情况下,不同形式的强制接种可能是保护公众健康的捷径,但需要强调的是,最终的公共卫生目标是促进自愿、知情和负责任地遵守预防行为。