Ethical Considerations on Vaccination

Ethical Considerations on Vaccination
Your Name
Subject and Section
Professor’s name
Date
Immunization is critical in the healthcare field as it is a proven effective method in reducing or eradicating viral and microbial infections. It is a preventive measure that protects the public, including all the citizens, whether working in the healthcare field or not. Given the recent pandemic, the medical field has instigated the essentiality of vaccinations, which drives the governments to mandate it (Diomidous & Isaakidou, 2020). Ethical considerations sprung as many opposed arguing that it must be a right rather than a rule, especially in countries where democracy is respected. Before mandating vaccinations, it is vital to analyze the ethical considerations that surround the issue.
Four main ethical arguments will be analyzed, including two pros and two cons. First, immunization protects the specific target microorganism, which protects against other pathogens (D’Amico et al., 2021). Second, it is a social responsibility, such that those vaccinated protect the immunocompromised and the children whose immune systems are not yet fully developed (Barnhart, 2016; D’Amico et al., 2021). Third, vaccinations may still pose a risk, despite claiming that the benefit outweighs it. Lastly, mandating vaccinations dissolves the right to object (Clarke et al., 2017) dutifully.
The central ethical conflict is subjecting the free citizens to a mandatory vaccination, which dutifully disregards their right to decide. However, without mandatory vaccinations, the people who claim that their right to decide is neglected also disregards the right of other people to live, especially the elderly, who has several comorbidities, the young, whose immune systems are underdeveloped, and the immunocompromised, whose immune systems are insufficient in combating diseases.
The affected stakeholders are all living human beings. Specifically, the decision-makers in a pandemic are the government officials, medical and scientific experts, and the general public. In China, various reasons were stated for the use of vaccines. Government officials frequently follow the recommendation of health experts while the latter is generally deliberating mass immunizations despite the risk, on the premise that the pros outweigh the cons. Moreover, health experts attribute the issues to the symptoms of the disease instead of the vaccine’s side effects (Yang et al., 2020).
On the other hand, the general public has varying opinions. Remarkably, some parents oppose vaccinations due to the potential risks that may harm their children’s health. Some also argue that they do not trust the science behind it due to the fast-tracked vaccine development and believe some information is hidden. Others, however, agree with the medical experts. Lastly, media communications professionals argue that the government and health experts may conspire to provide false information or provide limited information so people will have a vague understanding of its risks and benefits (Yang et al., 2020).
Based on these statements, the government’s relationship with the general public bears structural interest conflicts with the general public since the ...