Why immunization must be made mandatory in times of vaccine hesitancy, and how we can design and implement immunization policies in a practical, trustworthy, and democratic way. We live in perilous times when a significant number of citizens are either defiantly antivaccination or hesitant to accept vaccinations for themselves or for their children. In
Inducing Immunity?, legal philosopher Roland Pierik and bioethicist Marcel Verweij, explore ways to regulate collective immunization in as democratic a manner as possible. Approaching the problem as a matter of a conflict between the responsibility of government to protect public health and the basic right to freedom of citizens, Pierik and Verweij argue that John Stuart Mill's harm principle--the idea that individuals should be free to act so long as their actions do not harm others--offers a strong basis for coercive immunization policies.
Covering childhood immunization policies, as well as vaccination programs aimed at adult citizens, the authors argue that a coercive immunization policy in any liberal democracy must first satisfy the principle of proportionality. This leads them to an in-depth exploration of the role of exemptions, the nature of coercion, and the contents of vaccination programs. In the final part of the book, the authors also discuss the importance and scope of freedom of speech, given how the current spread of misinformation has undermined confidence in vaccines.
Offering an in-depth analysis in bioethics and legal philosophy,
Inducing Immunity? is a sensible and applicable guide for health professionals, policymakers, and academics alike on how we can--and must--do better with our immunization policies.
為什麼在疫苗猶豫時期必須強制接種疫苗，以及我們如何以實際、可信和民主的方式設計和實施免疫政策。
我們生活在危險的時代，有相當多的公民要麼堅決反對接種疫苗，要麼對自己或子女的疫苗接受持猶豫態度。在《誘導免疫？》一書中，法律哲學家羅蘭·皮里克（Roland Pierik）和生物倫理學家馬塞爾·韋爾維（Marcel Verweij）探討了以盡可能民主的方式來規範集體免疫的方法。他們將問題視為政府保護公共衛生責任與公民基本自由權利之間的衝突，主張約翰·斯圖爾特·密爾（John Stuart Mill）的傷害原則——即只要個人的行為不損害他人，他們應該自由行動——為強制性免疫政策提供了堅實的基礎。
該書涵蓋了兒童免疫政策以及針對成年公民的疫苗接種計劃，作者認為在任何自由民主國家中，強制性免疫政策必須首先滿足比例原則。這使他們深入探討了豁免的角色、強制的性質以及疫苗接種計劃的內容。在書的最後部分，作者還討論了言論自由的重要性和範圍，鑑於當前的錯誤信息傳播已經破壞了對疫苗的信心。
《誘導免疫？》提供了生物倫理學和法律哲學的深入分析，對於醫療專業人員、政策制定者和學者來說，它是一本明智且實用的指南，關於我們如何以更好的方式改進我們的免疫政策。
Roland Pierik is Professor of Philosophy of Law at the Faculty of Law, Maastricht University, the Netherlands. Pierik was a member of the Health Council of the Netherlands and served in the Health Council's permanent committee on vaccinations, as well as on the committee for COVID-19.
Marcel Verweij is Professor of Philosophical Ethics at Utrecht University. With Angus Dawson, he initiated the journal
Public Health Ethics. He has fulfilled advisory roles for public health institutes such as the ECDC, the Health Council of the Netherlands, and the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment and has written discussion papers for the World Health Organization on the ethics of maternal immunization and on pandemic preparedness.
Roland Pierik是荷蘭馬斯特里赫特大學法學院的法律哲學教授。Pierik曾是荷蘭衛生委員會的成員，並在該委員會的疫苗常設委員會以及COVID-19委員會中擔任職務。
Marcel Verweij是荷蘭烏特勒支大學的哲學倫理學教授。他與Angus Dawson共同創辦了《公共衛生倫理學》期刊。他曾擔任歐洲疾病預防控制中心、荷蘭衛生委員會和國家公共衛生與環境研究所等公共衛生機構的顧問角色，並為世界衛生組織撰寫了關於母親免疫和大流行準備的倫理討論文件。
