No Need for Parental Involvement in the Vaccination Choice of Adolescents.

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-21 DOI:10.1007/s11673-023-10252-9
M Brusa, Y M Barilan
{"title":"No Need for Parental Involvement in the Vaccination Choice of Adolescents.","authors":"M Brusa, Y M Barilan","doi":"10.1007/s11673-023-10252-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Parental decision making is necessary for contracting medical interventions that require personal risk-benefit evaluation, and for overseeing matters of education. In the nineteenth century, exemptions from obligatory vaccination were granted for religious and conscientious reasons. Then and today, religion and moral values play marginal roles in vaccine hesitancy and denialism. Rather, the key values invoked by vaccine hesitants and denialists are liberty and pluralism. Neither is compatible with limiting adolescents' choice. Because vaccination does not require assessment of personal medical risks, because it does not need to occur within the sphere of the doctor-patient relationship, and because the risk involved is within the range of their daily activities, adolescents have the right to free access to vaccination without legal requirement of parental involvement. Drawing on the development of Common Law, and on the development of respect for personal conscience in the history of ideas, this paper does not promote an argument that grants public health an overriding moral power. Rather, this paper rejects the presumption that vaccination of adolescents might involve a conflict between parental authority and public health. Free access to vaccination is compatible with the law and ethics of adolescents' evolving autonomy in relation to healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"47-54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-023-10252-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Parental decision making is necessary for contracting medical interventions that require personal risk-benefit evaluation, and for overseeing matters of education. In the nineteenth century, exemptions from obligatory vaccination were granted for religious and conscientious reasons. Then and today, religion and moral values play marginal roles in vaccine hesitancy and denialism. Rather, the key values invoked by vaccine hesitants and denialists are liberty and pluralism. Neither is compatible with limiting adolescents' choice. Because vaccination does not require assessment of personal medical risks, because it does not need to occur within the sphere of the doctor-patient relationship, and because the risk involved is within the range of their daily activities, adolescents have the right to free access to vaccination without legal requirement of parental involvement. Drawing on the development of Common Law, and on the development of respect for personal conscience in the history of ideas, this paper does not promote an argument that grants public health an overriding moral power. Rather, this paper rejects the presumption that vaccination of adolescents might involve a conflict between parental authority and public health. Free access to vaccination is compatible with the law and ethics of adolescents' evolving autonomy in relation to healthcare.

父母无需参与青少年的疫苗接种选择。
父母的决策对于签订需要个人风险收益评估的医疗干预措施和监督教育事务是必要的。在十九世纪,出于宗教和良心原因,给予了强制性疫苗接种豁免。当时和今天,宗教和道德价值观在疫苗犹豫和否认中发挥着边缘作用。相反,疫苗犹豫者和否认者所援引的关键价值观是自由和多元主义。两者都不符合限制青少年的选择。由于疫苗接种不需要评估个人医疗风险,也不需要在医患关系范围内进行,而且所涉及的风险在他们的日常活动范围内,青少年有权在没有父母参与的法律要求的情况下免费获得疫苗接种。本文借鉴了普通法的发展,以及思想史上尊重个人良知的发展,并没有提出赋予公共卫生压倒一切的道德力量的论点。相反,本文驳斥了青少年接种疫苗可能涉及父母权威和公共卫生之间冲突的假设。免费接种疫苗符合青少年在医疗保健方面不断发展的自主权的法律和道德。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The JBI welcomes both reports of empirical research and articles that increase theoretical understanding of medicine and health care, the health professions and the biological sciences. The JBI is also open to critical reflections on medicine and conventional bioethics, the nature of health, illness and disability, the sources of ethics, the nature of ethical communities, and possible implications of new developments in science and technology for social and cultural life and human identity. We welcome contributions from perspectives that are less commonly published in existing journals in the field and reports of empirical research studies using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The JBI accepts contributions from authors working in or across disciplines including – but not limited to – the following: -philosophy- bioethics- economics- social theory- law- public health and epidemiology- anthropology- psychology- feminism- gay and lesbian studies- linguistics and discourse analysis- cultural studies- disability studies- history- literature and literary studies- environmental sciences- theology and religious studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信