Disagreement Over Vaccination Programmes: Deep Or Merely Complex and Why Does It Matter?
- Tim Dare
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
This paper argues that significant aspects of the vaccination debate are ‘deep’ in a sense described by Robert Fogelin and others. Some commentators have suggested that such disagreements warrant rather threatening responses. I argue that appreciating that a disagreement is deep might have positive implications, changing our moral assessment of individuals and their decisions, shedding light on the limits of the obligation to give and respond to arguments in cases of moral disagreement, and providing an incentive to seek alternative ways of going on in the face of intractable moral disagreement. Non-coercive, non-reasoned strategies have been used or recommended to increase vaccination rates. Such strategies look problematic when judged by the standards of ideal moral and rational argumentation, but more acceptable if seen as responses to deep disagreements.
- Australian Government Department of Health and Aging, Strengthening Immunisation for Children. Retrieved from http://immunise.health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishing.nsf/Content/factsheet-strengthening-immunisation.
- Banerjeen, A. V., Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Kothari, D. (2010). Improving immunisation coverage in rural India: Clustered randomised controlled evaluation of immunisation campaigns with and without incentives. BMJ, 340, c2220. CrossRef
- Beyerstein, B. L. (2001). Alternative medicine and common errors of reasoning. Academic Medicine, 76(3), 230–237. CrossRef
- Cunningham R. M., & Boom, J. A. (2013). ‘Telling Stories of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases: Why it Works’ in The Story Of Immunization: A Special Edition Of South Dakota Medicine, 21–26.
- Dare, T. (1998). Mass immunisation programmes: Some philosophical issues. Bioethics, 12(2), 125–149. CrossRef
- Davis, J. K. (2010). An alternative to relativism. Philosophical Topics, 38(2), 17–37. CrossRef
- Feudtner, C., & Marcuse, E. (2001). Ethics and immunization policy: Promoting dialogue to sustain consensus. Pediatrics, 107(5), 1158–1164. CrossRef
- Fogelin, R. (1985). The logic of deep disagreements. Informal Logic, 7, 1–8.
- Grant, R. W., & Sugarman, J. (2004). Ethics in human subjects research: Do incentives matter? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29(6), 717–738. CrossRef
- Kölbel, M. (2003). Faultless disagreements. Proceedings of the Aristotlelian Society, 104, 53–73. CrossRef
- Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. CrossRef
- Last, J. M. (1998). Public health and human ecology (2nd ed., pp. 353–354). Ottawa, ON: Appleton and Lange.
- Moskowitz, R. ‘The Case Against Immunizations’ vaccination risk awareness network. Retrieved from http://vran.org/about-vaccines/general-issues/doctors-speak/the-case-against-immunizatons/.
- New Zealand Ministry of Health. ‘National immunisation coverage reports’. Retrieved from www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/indexmh/immunisation-coverage-data.
- New Zealand Ministry of Health. (1995). Ministry of Health National Immunisation Strategy. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
- Noble, M. (2005). Ethics in the trenches: A multifaceted analysis of the stem cell debate. Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, 1(4), 76–345. CrossRef
- Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303–330. CrossRef
- NZ Immunisation Awareness Society, ‘Vaccine Deaths’, Immunisation Awareness Society. Retrieved Jan 17, 2013 from http://www.ias.org.nz/vaccination-2/vaccine-deaths/.
- Poland, G. A., & Jacobson, R. M. (2001). Understanding those who do not understand: A brief review of the anti-vaccine movement. Vaccine, 19, 2440–2445. CrossRef
- Protkin, S., & Protkin, S. (2013). A short history of vaccination. In S. Protkin, W. Orenstein, & P. Offit (Eds.), Vaccines (6th ed.). Philadelphia: WB Saunders.
- Relman, A. (1998). A trip to Stonesville: Some notes on Andrew Weil. The New Republic, 219(24), 28–36.
- Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Turner, N. (2012). The challenge of improving immunization coverage: The New Zealand example. Expert Review of Vaccines, 11(1), 9–11. CrossRef
- United States Centre for Disease Control, ‘Vaccine Safety’, Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases: The pink book 12th Edition. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/safety.pdf.
- Wakefield, A. J., Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., et al. (1998). Ileal–lymphoid–nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet, 351(9103), 637–641. (Retracted). CrossRef
- Ward, K., Brynley, P., & Hull, J. L. (2013). Financial incentives for childhood immunisation: A unique but changing Australian initiative. Medical Journal of Australia, 198(11), 590–592. CrossRef
- Weil, A. (1983). Health and healing. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
- Weil, A., & Relman, A. (1999). Is Integrative Medicine the Future? In S Bunk (Ed.), The Scientist, 13(10): 1.
- Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On Certainty (A. Gem & G. H. Von Wright Eds., Trans. D. Paul). J&J Harper: New York.
- Zhou, F., Santoli, J., & Messonnier, M. L. (2005). Economic evaluation of the 7-vaccine routine childhood immunization schedule in the United States, 2001. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 159(11), 1136–1144. CrossRef
- Disagreement Over Vaccination Programmes: Deep Or Merely Complex and Why Does It Matter?
Volume 26, Issue 1 , pp 43-57
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Vaccination programs
- Deep moral disagreement
- Non-coercive vaccination strategies
- Industry Sectors
- Tim Dare (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Philosophy, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand