Skip to main content

Should COVID-19 Vaccines be Mandatory?

 I think we’re headed in that direction.  There are various angles and positions to consider.  But, as in so many disputes, it’s not a matter of right and wrong but an issue of which side has the better argument. When a judge rules for one party in a dispute, this does not mean that the other side had no legitimate position.  If means that the judge concluded that an analysis of the facts and the law tilted toward one side.

We must acknowledge that an individual has a right not to be forced to accept a vaccine or any medical treatment.  The doctrines of informed consent and patient autonomy are bedrock pillars in American medical care.  If, for example, I recommend a colonoscopy to a patient with symptoms highly suggestive of a serious colon condition, the patient is free to decline my advice.  While I may feel strongly that this decision – referred to as informed refusal – is unwise, no medical practitioner or ethicist would argue that I should be able to compel compliance with my advice. 



Patient autonomy and the right to refuse medical treatment becomes murky when there is a public health dimension to the issue.  The patient cited above who declines a colonoscopy may be incurring personal risk but his decision does not threaten the community.  In contrast, an individual who refuses a vaccine threatens others and is a direct obstacle to public health efforts to protect the citizenry.  So, while the individual has rights so does the community.  The issue then become which side’s rights should prevail?

In America, there has been great reluctance to mandate COVID-19 vaccinations for various reasons.  The vaccines have still not been granted formal approval from the Food and Drug Administration. Initially, there was not sufficient vaccine supply to meet demand.  Employers were concerned over legal exposure to mandate the vaccine for employers.   And, just as we saw with face masks, the vaccines became highly politicized. 

The hope was that Americans would achieve the task voluntarily.  But we haven’t.  Even now, less than half of all Americans have been fully vaccinated.  Does this fact astonish you?

The calculus regarding mandating vaccines is changing.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has concluded that employers may mandate vaccines providing that there are exceptions for medical disability and religious reasons.   This gives cover to businesses and organizations who are ready to take the next step. Increasingly Republican political leaders and conservative commentators – after months of silence or actual support for anti-vaxxers – are now advocating for the vaccine.  And most importantly, we are now seeing a sharp spike across the country with rising cases that are filling up hospital and intensive care unit beds in nearly all 50 states.  And it’s going to get worse.  And we know why it’s happening.  The vast majority of these cases are occurring in unvaccinated individuals.  All of this was preventable.

So, which side do you think has the better argument?

 

Comments

  1. Another thoughtful and timely piece. I favor a comprehensive, balanced approach with mandates for certain groups( health care workers, military, teachers) vaccination passports and giving private industry the option to protect their employees and customers the way they want ( i.e. mask or vaccine). I also would pull in leaders of all kinds including Trump led events touting his vaccination genius. Beat this pandemic by any means necessary!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thx, Elliot, for your thoughtful comment. In retrospect, imagine where we would be if we had reached herd immunity a few months ago, either by voluntary cooperation or mandate? This saga had been marked by so much frustration, defiance and missed opportunities.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Most Doctors Choose Employment

Increasingly, physicians today are employed and most of them willingly so.  The advantages of this employment model, which I will highlight below, appeal to the current and emerging generations of physicians and medical professionals.  In addition, the alternatives to direct employment are scarce, although they do exist.  Private practice gastroenterology practices in Cleveland, for example, are increasingly rare sightings.  Another practice model is gaining ground rapidly on the medical landscape.   Private equity (PE) firms have   been purchasing medical practices who are in need of capital and management oversight.   PE can provide services efficiently as they may be serving multiple practices and have economies of scale.   While these physicians technically have authority over all medical decisions, the PE partners can exert behavioral influences on physicians which can be ethically problematic. For example, if the PE folks reduce non-medical overhead, this may very directly affe

Should Doctors Wear White Coats?

Many professions can be easily identified by their uniforms or state of dress. Consider how easy it is for us to identify a policeman, a judge, a baseball player, a housekeeper, a chef, or a soldier.  There must be a reason why so many professions require a uniform.  Presumably, it is to create team spirit among colleagues and to communicate a message to the clientele.  It certainly doesn’t enhance professional performance.  For instance, do we think if a judge ditches the robe and is wearing jeans and a T-shirt, that he or she cannot issue sage rulings?  If members of a baseball team showed up dressed in comfortable street clothes, would they commit more errors or achieve fewer hits?  The medical profession for most of its existence has had its own uniform.   Male doctors donned a shirt and tie and all doctors wore the iconic white coat.   The stated reason was that this created an aura of professionalism that inspired confidence in patients and their families.   Indeed, even today

Electronic Medical Records vs Physicians: Not a Fair Fight!

Each work day, I enter the chamber of horrors also known as the electronic medical record (EMR).  I’ve endured several versions of this torture over the years, monstrosities that were designed more to appeal to the needs of billers and coders than physicians. Make sense? I will admit that my current EMR, called Epic, is more physician-friendly than prior competitors, but it remains a formidable adversary.  And it’s not a fair fight.  You might be a great chess player, but odds are that you will not vanquish a computer adversary armed with artificial intelligence. I have a competitive advantage over many other physician contestants in the battle of Man vs Machine.   I can type well and can do so while maintaining eye contact with the patient.   You must think I am a magician or a savant.   While this may be true, the birth of my advanced digital skills started decades ago.   (As an aside, digital competence is essential for gastroenterologists.) During college, I worked as a secretary