Skip to main content

My Right to Refuse a COVID-19 Vaccine

I’m long on the record that we need to recalibrate the balance between individual freedom and society’s rights.  Personal freedom is often at the direct expense of society’s rights and expectations.  For example, an individual may argue that he has a right to air travel without having to proffer a government authorized ID or to submit to a search of his luggage. On this example, I think most of us would argue that society’s rights would prevail.

And there needs to be personal responsibility and accountability when one exercises particular personal freedoms.  If you want to ride a motorcycle, for example, then your insurance risks should be priced accordingly.  And if you don’t want to wear a helmet while riding, then you and other helmetless riders need to share in this risk so the rest of us don’t have to pay when an unwelcome event occurs on your ride. 

As in everything else in life, this terrain can become murky.  If a patient declines surgery that her medical team unanimously recommends, and as a result a long and expensive hospital stay ensues, would we hold her to be financially responsible?  No, we would not, but it does pose ethical questions.



Choosing Death Over a Vaccine!

Recently, an individual on kidney dialysis was deemed to be ineligible for transplant after refusing a COVID-19 vaccine.  Another patient was denied a heart transplant for the same reason.

Of course, these patients have the right to refuse the vaccine and any medical intervention.  I suspect that most of us in their circumstances would have decided the matter differently. The cardiac patient will likely die and the renal patient will face a shorter lifetime suffering under dialysis. And because of these 2 patient’s decisions, the rest of us must pick up the lifelong costs of dialysis, hospitalizations, etc.  Of course, society will absorb all of these avoidable costs which does bring up an issue of fairness.

Transplant physicians are empowered to establish medical criteria that must be abided by transplant candidates.  They have a responsibility to maximize the probability that the transplanted organs will successfully endure. 

In the current political climate, I’m surprised that no politician has railed from a podium demanding a law that would prohibit medical professionals from requiring a COVID-19 vaccine.

What would we think of another country, whose policies we would ordinarily decry, who mandated 100% vaccinations and have very low rates of illness, death, hospitalizations and economic disruption?  I’m not advocating for authoritarianism, but personal freedom can exact steep costs on society.  Are you ready for a conversation to consider a recalibration of our rights?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

When Should Doctors Retire?

I am asked with some regularity whether I am aiming to retire in the near term.  Years ago, I never received such inquiries.  Why now?   Might it be because my coiffure and goatee – although finely-manicured – has long entered the gray area?  Could it be because many other even younger physicians have given up their stethoscopes for lives of leisure? (Hopefully, my inquiring patients are not suspecting me of professional performance lapses!) Interestingly, a nurse in my office recently approached me and asked me sotto voce that she heard I was retiring.    “Interesting,” I remarked.   Since I was unaware of this retirement news, I asked her when would be my last day at work.   I have no idea where this erroneous rumor originated from.   I requested that my nurse-friend contact her flawed intel source and set him or her straight.   Retirement might seem tempting to me as I have so many other interests.   Indeed, reading and ...

Stop Medical Malpractice: The White Coat Wall of Silence

Photo Credit Leisure Guy, one of my most faithful commenters, opines that I am omitting an important aspect of the tort reform argument. He has implored me repeatedly to read a particular book that I suspect buttresses his views, but this worthy pursuit is simply not near the top of my priority pyramid. Since he’s retired, he enjoys the luxury of burrowing deeply into the base of his priority pyramid. With 4 tuitions to go, retirement is a distant mirage for me. I’m can be a ‘leisure guy’, but only in my dreams. I have written throughout this blog and elsewhere that there are too many frivolous lawsuits against physicians. I have admitted that caps on non-economic damages are not ideal, because they deny some worthy plaintiffs of complete compensation, but I support them because I believe they serve the greater good. I have ranted that there is no effective filter to screen out physicians who should never be invited to the litigation party in the first place. I believe that the...

Prostate Cancer Screening: Stop The PSA Train!

About 10 years ago, my dad was to see his general internist. I have always refrained from giving medical advice to my family, for all of the reasons why doctors should not treat or advise their relatives. But, on this occasion, I did give Dad some unsolicited advice, particularly as I knew that his physician fired the diagnostic testing trigger readily. “Dad, please make sure that he doesn’t check the PSA (prostate specific antigen) test.” Dad indicated that he would convey my concern to his doctor, who ran the test on him anyway. Apparently, he includes the PSA test as a matter of routine on all men over a certain age. Twenty-five years ago as a curious, but skeptical medical student, I learned about prostate cancer. I learned that every man will develop it if he lives long enough. I learned that most cases of prostate cancer remain silent and never interfere with the individual’s life. I learned that the treatment for these cancers involves either major surgery or radiation, both of ...