{"id":672,"date":"2023-05-18T03:12:24","date_gmt":"2023-05-18T07:12:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/?post_type=chapter&p=672"},"modified":"2023-05-18T03:12:24","modified_gmt":"2023-05-18T07:12:24","slug":"literature-review-ethics-of-mandatory-vaccination-for-healthcare-workers","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/chapter\/literature-review-ethics-of-mandatory-vaccination-for-healthcare-workers\/","title":{"raw":"Literature Review: Ethics of Mandatory Vaccination for Healthcare Workers","rendered":"Literature Review: Ethics of Mandatory Vaccination for Healthcare Workers"},"content":{"raw":"

Ethics of Mandatory Vaccination for Healthcare Workers <\/em><\/strong><\/h2>\r\nGur-Arie et al. (2021) wrote a commentary about the ethical issues regarding mandatory Covid-19 vaccination of healthcare personnel. The sample population includes all frontline workers (physicians, assistants, laboratory technicians, students in residency, etc.) who have directly and indirectly been around Covid-19 patients and have faced staff and resource shortages throughout the pandemic (p.1). The variables within the research are vaccine hesitancy among healthcare personnel (HCP) based on concerns of efficacy and perceived low risk of infection among personnel not working with Covid-19 patients. Their variables supporting mandatory vaccination for HCP include the principle of \u2018do no harm\u2019 and the duty of care involved with the healthcare industry (pp. 1-2). For the purpose of this Literature Review, it will focus on the ethical principle of healthcare which is \u2018do no harm\u2019. The main question of Gur-Arie et al.'s research is whether to mandate vaccinations for healthcare workers and how to implement it without a breach of ethics (pp. 1-2).\r\n\r\nPolicy should attempt to draw on current evidence, [...] manage residual uncertainties, and prepare for future developments.\u00a0 On one end of the vaccine policy spectrum are less restrictive options\u2014opt-in, voluntary recommendations, and so on\u2014while on the other end, there are more restrictive options\u2014compulsory mandates backed with legal and financial penalties, with non-compliance potentially resulting in imprisonment. (Gur-Arie et al., 2021, p. 2)\r\n\r\nThe above quotation outlines the different methods available to institutions when considering how best to implement policies to protect the individuals affected by their decisions, whether students in a university or staff in a hospital. However, any methodology chosen should be adequately measured against the risks associated with the phenomenon the institution wants to protect their staff or students against\u2014in the case of the current pandemic, Covid-19 and the risks associated with receiving and not receiving a vaccine against it. However, the greatest benefit from vaccines comes from a significant sum of the population receiving their immunization and maintaining that significant percentage (Herd Immunity) \u2014 a feat where hesitancies would have to be put aside for the greater good of public health (Giubilini, 2021, pp. 6-7).\r\n\r\nGur-Arie et al. (2021) argue the principle of \u2018do no harm\u2019 as \u201cone of the key justifications for requiring HCP to be vaccinated or show immunity against other documented occupational threats such as hepatitis B, measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria and pertussis31\u201d (p. 3). The researchers\u2019 point of \u2018vaccines worked before, so keep vaccinating\u2019 has objective support based on most of the aforementioned conditions significantly decreasing in frequency after their vaccines were developed and distributed. Debates on ethics suggest less intrusive methods for reducing transmission before implementing a vaccine mandate, such as increased personal protective equipment (PPE) (p. 3). However, a central characteristic of the pandemic has been the resource shortages experienced and the exposure to improper systemic protections, such as a lack of ventilation within healthcare facilities. Gur-Arie et al. argue that the \u201cfailed institutional responsibility to assist HCP in the fulfillment of their duties to \u2018do no harm\u2019 weakens appeals to such duties in the justification of vaccine mandates\u201d (p. 3).\r\n\r\nGur-Arie et al. (2021) conclude that although a vaccine mandate for healthcare workers may be seen as an end-all-be-all for increasing vaccination rates, it does not equitably weigh all the associated ethical concerns (p. 4). Instead, they suggest that institutions start developing vaccine campaigns based on education to promote voluntary vaccinations, as most individuals prefer to make their own informed decisions. By facilitating vaccine-related conversation, institutions can hear healthcare personnel\u2019s ethics concerns and their firsthand experience of a public health crisis (p. 4). Open communication around vaccination can lead to a similar approach with other private, public, and government-run institutions, which prioritizes education over coercion. This review was included within the research study because it highlights the importance of educating affected individuals on the reasoning behind instituting mandatory vaccination. Individuals are more likely to agree with something if given a valid purpose behind it because it makes the regulation less daunting and more reasonable.","rendered":"

Ethics of Mandatory Vaccination for Healthcare Workers <\/em><\/strong><\/h2>\n

Gur-Arie et al. (2021) wrote a commentary about the ethical issues regarding mandatory Covid-19 vaccination of healthcare personnel. The sample population includes all frontline workers (physicians, assistants, laboratory technicians, students in residency, etc.) who have directly and indirectly been around Covid-19 patients and have faced staff and resource shortages throughout the pandemic (p.1). The variables within the research are vaccine hesitancy among healthcare personnel (HCP) based on concerns of efficacy and perceived low risk of infection among personnel not working with Covid-19 patients. Their variables supporting mandatory vaccination for HCP include the principle of \u2018do no harm\u2019 and the duty of care involved with the healthcare industry (pp. 1-2). For the purpose of this Literature Review, it will focus on the ethical principle of healthcare which is \u2018do no harm\u2019. The main question of Gur-Arie et al.’s research is whether to mandate vaccinations for healthcare workers and how to implement it without a breach of ethics (pp. 1-2).<\/p>\n

Policy should attempt to draw on current evidence, […] manage residual uncertainties, and prepare for future developments.\u00a0 On one end of the vaccine policy spectrum are less restrictive options\u2014opt-in, voluntary recommendations, and so on\u2014while on the other end, there are more restrictive options\u2014compulsory mandates backed with legal and financial penalties, with non-compliance potentially resulting in imprisonment. (Gur-Arie et al., 2021, p. 2)<\/p>\n

The above quotation outlines the different methods available to institutions when considering how best to implement policies to protect the individuals affected by their decisions, whether students in a university or staff in a hospital. However, any methodology chosen should be adequately measured against the risks associated with the phenomenon the institution wants to protect their staff or students against\u2014in the case of the current pandemic, Covid-19 and the risks associated with receiving and not receiving a vaccine against it. However, the greatest benefit from vaccines comes from a significant sum of the population receiving their immunization and maintaining that significant percentage (Herd Immunity) \u2014 a feat where hesitancies would have to be put aside for the greater good of public health (Giubilini, 2021, pp. 6-7).<\/p>\n

Gur-Arie et al. (2021) argue the principle of \u2018do no harm\u2019 as \u201cone of the key justifications for requiring HCP to be vaccinated or show immunity against other documented occupational threats such as hepatitis B, measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria and pertussis31\u201d (p. 3). The researchers\u2019 point of \u2018vaccines worked before, so keep vaccinating\u2019 has objective support based on most of the aforementioned conditions significantly decreasing in frequency after their vaccines were developed and distributed. Debates on ethics suggest less intrusive methods for reducing transmission before implementing a vaccine mandate, such as increased personal protective equipment (PPE) (p. 3). However, a central characteristic of the pandemic has been the resource shortages experienced and the exposure to improper systemic protections, such as a lack of ventilation within healthcare facilities. Gur-Arie et al. argue that the \u201cfailed institutional responsibility to assist HCP in the fulfillment of their duties to \u2018do no harm\u2019 weakens appeals to such duties in the justification of vaccine mandates\u201d (p. 3).<\/p>\n

Gur-Arie et al. (2021) conclude that although a vaccine mandate for healthcare workers may be seen as an end-all-be-all for increasing vaccination rates, it does not equitably weigh all the associated ethical concerns (p. 4). Instead, they suggest that institutions start developing vaccine campaigns based on education to promote voluntary vaccinations, as most individuals prefer to make their own informed decisions. By facilitating vaccine-related conversation, institutions can hear healthcare personnel\u2019s ethics concerns and their firsthand experience of a public health crisis (p. 4). Open communication around vaccination can lead to a similar approach with other private, public, and government-run institutions, which prioritizes education over coercion. This review was included within the research study because it highlights the importance of educating affected individuals on the reasoning behind instituting mandatory vaccination. Individuals are more likely to agree with something if given a valid purpose behind it because it makes the regulation less daunting and more reasonable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"menu_order":6,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-672","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":652,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/672","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/29"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/672\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":673,"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/672\/revisions\/673"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/652"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/672\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=672"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=672"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=672"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openbooks.macewan.ca\/researchincommunication\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=672"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}