Selfish antivaxxers - "freedom" to not vaccinate is dangerous to themselves and others
Echo opinion published in The Times-Independent, a newspaper in Moab Utah.
Oh Paleeeze!
In fact, the choice to avoid being vaccinated can and should have social costs. This debate is not about freedom versus tyranny; it is about finding the proper balance between individual choice or responsibility and protecting the freedom of others to live their lives without the constant fear of catching a potentially lethal (and oftentimes preventable!) illness.
First, let’s recognize that no one is compelled to get vaccinated against COVID, or any other disease, nor will they be arrested for refusing a vaccination. Anyone who wishes to decline the vaccine is free to say no. There might indeed be some negative consequences attached to that refusal, but people who are willing to accept those can stay unvaccinated. They retain their full freedom of choice.
Second, the Supreme Court ruled in a 1905 case (Jacobson v Massachusetts) that, as a general principle, the state has the power to impose “reasonable regulations” such as vaccination requirements to protect public health and safety. While individuals do have a sphere of personal liberty, it is not absolute. Moreover, as Justice Harlan noted in the majority opinion, the state does not have a right to force someone to be vaccinated, only to impose a cost (here a fine) upon that person for refusing to do so.
Third, it has become settled law that states may impose vaccination requirements on families that want to send their children to public schools. All 50 states require that kids have the well-known DTaP, chickenpox, and polio vaccinations before they enter kindergarten, and most states (including Utah) also require inoculations against hepatitis B for children.
Note that there are exemptions available for religious (and sometimes other) reasons. In short, vaccination mandates for COVID-19 have not descended from out of the blue; they simply continue a long-established pattern—affirmed by the courts—of safeguarding public health. To reject vaccinations for one’s own children may in fact pose the gravest threat to their liberties, since they might end up seriously ill or even dead from preventable diseases.
This brief review establishes a clear general principle: those who oppose vaccinations for themselves or their children have the freedom to say no, but their refusal will have costs that can be steep. COVID vaccination refusers who work for certain airlines may be fired; ditto medical professionals and teachers in some states or localities.
Anti-vaxxers might have to homeschool their children. And the Biden administration has decreed that all companies with over 100 employees must require vaccinations, but also give employees the option of weekly testing for COVID. In some venues, bars and restaurants may refuse to serve customers who can’t show proof of vaccination.
Those measures do not deprive anyone of personal freedom, but they impose costs on some of their choices, and rightly so. Declining a vaccination for a deadly disease for oneself or one’s children puts many other people at risk and curtails their freedom, especially people too young to get vaccinated and those who cannot be because of certain pre-existing conditions.
A parallel case involves drunk driving. Anyone is free to get drunk at home. But he or she is not free to get behind the wheel and endanger others. So, if drunk drivers are pulled over, given a ticket, and forced to spend the night in jail, they have no grounds for complaining about freedom denied.
They made a choice and must live with the consequences. If you don’t want a society in which drunk drivers roam our highways, you should not want one in which unvaccinated people claim the right to be in our schools, hospitals, and workplaces no matter the impact on everyone else’s liberties
Lew Hinchman writes from Moab, Utah.
First, let’s recognize that no one is compelled to get vaccinated against COVID, or any other disease, nor will they be arrested for refusing a vaccination. Anyone who wishes to decline the vaccine is free to say no. There might indeed be some negative consequences attached to that refusal, but people who are willing to accept those can stay unvaccinated. They retain their full freedom of choice.
Second, the Supreme Court ruled in a 1905 case (Jacobson v Massachusetts) that, as a general principle, the state has the power to impose “reasonable regulations” such as vaccination requirements to protect public health and safety. While individuals do have a sphere of personal liberty, it is not absolute. Moreover, as Justice Harlan noted in the majority opinion, the state does not have a right to force someone to be vaccinated, only to impose a cost (here a fine) upon that person for refusing to do so.
Third, it has become settled law that states may impose vaccination requirements on families that want to send their children to public schools. All 50 states require that kids have the well-known DTaP, chickenpox, and polio vaccinations before they enter kindergarten, and most states (including Utah) also require inoculations against hepatitis B for children.
Note that there are exemptions available for religious (and sometimes other) reasons. In short, vaccination mandates for COVID-19 have not descended from out of the blue; they simply continue a long-established pattern—affirmed by the courts—of safeguarding public health. To reject vaccinations for one’s own children may in fact pose the gravest threat to their liberties, since they might end up seriously ill or even dead from preventable diseases.
This brief review establishes a clear general principle: those who oppose vaccinations for themselves or their children have the freedom to say no, but their refusal will have costs that can be steep. COVID vaccination refusers who work for certain airlines may be fired; ditto medical professionals and teachers in some states or localities.
Anti-vaxxers might have to homeschool their children. And the Biden administration has decreed that all companies with over 100 employees must require vaccinations, but also give employees the option of weekly testing for COVID. In some venues, bars and restaurants may refuse to serve customers who can’t show proof of vaccination.
Those measures do not deprive anyone of personal freedom, but they impose costs on some of their choices, and rightly so. Declining a vaccination for a deadly disease for oneself or one’s children puts many other people at risk and curtails their freedom, especially people too young to get vaccinated and those who cannot be because of certain pre-existing conditions.
A parallel case involves drunk driving. Anyone is free to get drunk at home. But he or she is not free to get behind the wheel and endanger others. So, if drunk drivers are pulled over, given a ticket, and forced to spend the night in jail, they have no grounds for complaining about freedom denied.
They made a choice and must live with the consequences. If you don’t want a society in which drunk drivers roam our highways, you should not want one in which unvaccinated people claim the right to be in our schools, hospitals, and workplaces no matter the impact on everyone else’s liberties
Lew Hinchman writes from Moab, Utah.
Labels: COVID, Lew Hinchman, Moab Utah, The Times-Independent
posted by Juliana L'Heureux | 5:45 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home