Cargando…

Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign

BACKGROUND: The detection of wild poliovirus in Israeli sewage in May 2013 led the health authorities to vaccinate children with OPV (Oral Polio Vaccine). Shelly Kamin-Friedman explored the legal and ethical dimensions of this policy. This commentary makes three claims: (1) Mandatory vaccination is...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Gostin, Lawrence O.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29298727
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13584-017-0198-4
_version_ 1783290289619730432
author Gostin, Lawrence O.
author_facet Gostin, Lawrence O.
author_sort Gostin, Lawrence O.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The detection of wild poliovirus in Israeli sewage in May 2013 led the health authorities to vaccinate children with OPV (Oral Polio Vaccine). Shelly Kamin-Friedman explored the legal and ethical dimensions of this policy. This commentary makes three claims: (1) Mandatory vaccination is a valid exercise of the state’s police powers to protect the common good. (2) A disease eradication campaign is a sufficient ground for the exercise of those powers. (3) The state is obliged to use the least restrictive/invasive measure to achieve community-wide vaccine coverage, but need not use less effective measures; further, determining which measure is most effective is a fact-specific determination. GOALS: This commentary offers grounds to support state powers to protect the public’s health and safety. It shows why governments have both the duty and power to safeguard the collective good. State powers also have limits, whose boundaries are determined by the public health necessity. If the state is reasonably using the least restrictive intervention to achieve an important public health objective, it is well within the limits of its authority. METHOD: The commentary uses legal and ethical norms and evidence to support its conclusions. MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION: Governments have a duty and power to achieve population-based vaccine coverage sufficient to stem the spread of infectious diseases, including in isolated geographical areas with high numbers of individuals claiming religious and/or conscientious exemptions to vaccine requirements. Governments are obliged to reasonably seek the least restrictive/invasive measure to achieve valid public health objectives; and governments are not obliged to use less effective measures simply because they are voluntary or less invasive. Finding the most effective, least invasive intervention is fact-specific. The essence of public health law is to recognize the state’s power and duty to safeguard the public’s health and safety, and to establish and enforce limits on those powers when the government overreaches—that is, adopts a measure more invasive/restrictive than needed to achieve a valid public health objective.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5753519
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57535192018-01-05 Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign Gostin, Lawrence O. Isr J Health Policy Res Commentary BACKGROUND: The detection of wild poliovirus in Israeli sewage in May 2013 led the health authorities to vaccinate children with OPV (Oral Polio Vaccine). Shelly Kamin-Friedman explored the legal and ethical dimensions of this policy. This commentary makes three claims: (1) Mandatory vaccination is a valid exercise of the state’s police powers to protect the common good. (2) A disease eradication campaign is a sufficient ground for the exercise of those powers. (3) The state is obliged to use the least restrictive/invasive measure to achieve community-wide vaccine coverage, but need not use less effective measures; further, determining which measure is most effective is a fact-specific determination. GOALS: This commentary offers grounds to support state powers to protect the public’s health and safety. It shows why governments have both the duty and power to safeguard the collective good. State powers also have limits, whose boundaries are determined by the public health necessity. If the state is reasonably using the least restrictive intervention to achieve an important public health objective, it is well within the limits of its authority. METHOD: The commentary uses legal and ethical norms and evidence to support its conclusions. MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION: Governments have a duty and power to achieve population-based vaccine coverage sufficient to stem the spread of infectious diseases, including in isolated geographical areas with high numbers of individuals claiming religious and/or conscientious exemptions to vaccine requirements. Governments are obliged to reasonably seek the least restrictive/invasive measure to achieve valid public health objectives; and governments are not obliged to use less effective measures simply because they are voluntary or less invasive. Finding the most effective, least invasive intervention is fact-specific. The essence of public health law is to recognize the state’s power and duty to safeguard the public’s health and safety, and to establish and enforce limits on those powers when the government overreaches—that is, adopts a measure more invasive/restrictive than needed to achieve a valid public health objective. BioMed Central 2018-01-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5753519/ /pubmed/29298727 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13584-017-0198-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Commentary
Gostin, Lawrence O.
Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign
title Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign
title_full Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign
title_fullStr Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign
title_full_unstemmed Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign
title_short Mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign
title_sort mandatory vaccination: understanding the common good in the midst of the global polio eradication campaign
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29298727
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13584-017-0198-4
work_keys_str_mv AT gostinlawrenceo mandatoryvaccinationunderstandingthecommongoodinthemidstoftheglobalpolioeradicationcampaign