Why vaccination should be compulsory
Print Edition
I鈥檓 writing from Victoria, the Australian state that became, in 1970, the first jurisdiction in the world to make it compulsory to wear a seat belt in a car. The legislation was attacked as a violation of individual freedom, but Victorians accepted it because it saved lives. Now most of the world has similar legislation. I can鈥檛 recall when I last heard someone demanding the freedom to drive without wearing a seat belt.
Instead, we are now hearing demands for the freedom to be unvaccinated against the virus that causes COVID-19. Brady Ellison, a member of the United States Olympic archery team, says his decision not to get vaccinated was 鈥渙ne hundred percent a personal choice,鈥 insisting that 鈥渁nyone that says otherwise is taking away people鈥檚 freedoms.鈥
The oddity, here, is that laws requiring us to wear seat belts really are quite straightforwardly infringing on freedom, whereas laws requiring people to be vaccinated if they are going to be in places where they could infect other people are restricting one kind of freedom in order to protect the freedom of others to go about their business safely.
Don鈥檛 misunderstand me. I strongly support laws requiring drivers and passengers in cars to wear seat belts. In the US, such laws are estimated to have saved approximately 370,000 lives, and to have prevented many more serious injuries. Nevertheless, these laws are paternalistic. They coerce us to do something for our own good. They violate John Stuart Mill鈥檚 famous principle: 鈥渢he only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.鈥 The fact that the coercion is for the individual鈥檚 own good is 鈥渘ot a sufficient warrant.鈥
There is a lot to be said for this principle, especially when it is used to oppose laws against victimless acts like homosexual relations between consenting adults or voluntary euthanasia. But Mill had more confidence in the ability of members of 鈥渃ivilized鈥 communities to make rational choices about their own interest than we can justifiably have today.
Before seat belts were made compulsory, governments ran campaigns to educate people about the risks of not wearing them. These campaigns had some effect, but the number of people who wore seat belts came nowhere near the 90 percent or more who wear them in the US today (with similar or higher figures in many other countries where not wearing them is an offense).
The reason is that we are not good at protecting ourselves against very small risks of disaster. Each time we get into a car, the chance that we will be involved in an accident serious enough to cause injury, if we are not wearing a seat belt, is very small. Nevertheless, given the negligible cost of wearing a belt, a reasonable calculation of one鈥檚 own interests shows that it is irrational not to wear one. Car crash survivors who were injured because they were not wearing seat belts recognize and regret their irrationality 鈥 but only when it is too late, as it always is for those who were killed while sitting on their belts.
We are now seeing a very similar situation with vaccination. Brytney Cobia recently posted on Facebook the following account of her experiences working as a doctor in Birmingham, Alabama:
鈥淚鈥檓 admitting young healthy people to the hospital with very serious COVID infections. One of the last things they do before they鈥檙e intubated is beg me for the vaccine. I hold their hand and tell them that I鈥檓 sorry, but it鈥檚 too late. A few days later when I call time of death, I hug their family members and I tell them the best way to honor their loved one is to go get vaccinated and encourage everyone they know to do the same. They cry. And they tell me they didn鈥檛 know. They thought it was a hoax. They thought it was political. They thought because they had a certain blood type or a certain skin color they wouldn鈥檛 get as sick. They thought it was 鈥榡ust the flu.鈥 But they were wrong. And they wish they could go back. But they can鈥檛.鈥
The same reason justifies making vaccination against COVID-19 compulsory: otherwise, too many people make decisions that they later regret. One would have to be monstrously callous to say: 鈥淚t鈥檚 their own fault, let them die.鈥
In any case, in the COVID era, making vaccination compulsory doesn鈥檛 violate Mill鈥檚 鈥渉arm to others鈥 principle. Unvaccinated Olympic athletes impose risks on others, just as speeding down a busy street does. The only 鈥減ersonal choice鈥 Ellison should have had was to get vaccinated or stay at home. If the International Olympic Committee had said that only vaccinated athletes can compete, that would have freed thousands of athletes from a heightened risk of infection, and would have justified overriding Ellison鈥檚 desire to compete without being vaccinated.
For the same reason, rules announced last month in France and Greece requiring that people going to cinemas, bars, or traveling on a train show proof of vaccination are not a violation of anyone鈥檚 freedom.
This past February, when the Indonesian government became the first to make vaccination mandatory for all adults, the real tragedy was not that it was violating the freedom of its citizens, but that richer countries did not donate the vaccines it needed to implement the law. As a result, Indonesia is now witnessing surging cases and tens of thousands of unvaccinated Indonesians have died.
Peter Singer is Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and founder of the non-profit organization The Life You Can Save. His books include Animal Liberation, Practical Ethics, Ethics in the Real World, Why Vegan?. In April, W.W. Norton published his new edition of Apuleius鈥檚 The Golden Ass. In 2013, he was named the world鈥檚 third 鈥渕ost influential contemporary thinker鈥 by the Gottlieb Duttweiler Institute. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2021. www.project-syndicate.org
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 娌狪CP璇侊細娌狪CP澶05050403鍙-1
- |
- 浜掕仈缃戞柊闂讳俊鎭湇鍔¤鍙瘉锛31120180004
- |
- 缃戠粶瑙嗗惉璁稿彲璇侊細0909346
- |
- 骞挎挱鐢佃鑺傜洰鍒朵綔璁稿彲璇侊細娌瓧绗354鍙
- |
- 澧炲肩數淇′笟鍔＄粡钀ヨ鍙瘉锛氭勃B2-20120012
Copyright 漏 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
