COVID – 19 VACCINE AND THE LEGAL CONUNDRUM OF INFORMED CONSENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY IN NIGERIA

L. A. Adeleke
{"title":"COVID – 19 VACCINE AND THE LEGAL CONUNDRUM OF INFORMED CONSENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY IN NIGERIA","authors":"L. A. Adeleke","doi":"10.36108/gjoboh/2202.10.0170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As the Covid -19 continues to ravage human population since December 2019, medical professionals and people from other turfs of human knowledge have remained awake, with a view to nipping the spread of the virus in the bud. As early as 30th January 2020, WHO declared the virus a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and an epidemic, with relentless efforts to arrest its spread. Yet, the virus nibbled away a large fortune in the global economy. While the virus becomes hydra-headed with its variants, vaccines have been developed to curtail its morbidity and mortality. Vaccinations are acknowledged as one of the most important and successful public health interventions. Nonetheless, there are legal hurdles to be crossed as vaccines are deployed to fight Covid-19 across the globe. Consent and fundamental rights of the individuals to be vaccinated sometimes conflict with the public health emergency needs, resulting in mandatory vaccination of every member of a given population. The two sides of the divide have their respective legal backings as inherent in the two locus classicus of Jacobson v. Massachusetts and Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital. The former established the principle of mandatory vaccination on account of public health emergency, while the principles of informed consent and self-determination have their roots in the latter. Subsequent cases, including Nigerian decisions in recent years have upheld the principle of informed consent and self-determination in medical treatment. The main thrust of this paper is to examine the effect of corona virus vaccination and Covid-19 status certificate on self-determination and human rights in Nigeria. The paper concludes that with deep rooted trust and transparency, suspicion and mistrust, which are the bedrock of the anti- vaccination movement will fizzle out and the legal conundrum ease off.","PeriodicalId":368795,"journal":{"name":"GET Journal of Biosecurity and One Health","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GET Journal of Biosecurity and One Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36108/gjoboh/2202.10.0170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As the Covid -19 continues to ravage human population since December 2019, medical professionals and people from other turfs of human knowledge have remained awake, with a view to nipping the spread of the virus in the bud. As early as 30th January 2020, WHO declared the virus a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and an epidemic, with relentless efforts to arrest its spread. Yet, the virus nibbled away a large fortune in the global economy. While the virus becomes hydra-headed with its variants, vaccines have been developed to curtail its morbidity and mortality. Vaccinations are acknowledged as one of the most important and successful public health interventions. Nonetheless, there are legal hurdles to be crossed as vaccines are deployed to fight Covid-19 across the globe. Consent and fundamental rights of the individuals to be vaccinated sometimes conflict with the public health emergency needs, resulting in mandatory vaccination of every member of a given population. The two sides of the divide have their respective legal backings as inherent in the two locus classicus of Jacobson v. Massachusetts and Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital. The former established the principle of mandatory vaccination on account of public health emergency, while the principles of informed consent and self-determination have their roots in the latter. Subsequent cases, including Nigerian decisions in recent years have upheld the principle of informed consent and self-determination in medical treatment. The main thrust of this paper is to examine the effect of corona virus vaccination and Covid-19 status certificate on self-determination and human rights in Nigeria. The paper concludes that with deep rooted trust and transparency, suspicion and mistrust, which are the bedrock of the anti- vaccination movement will fizzle out and the legal conundrum ease off.
尼日利亚Covid - 19疫苗与知情同意和突发公共卫生事件的法律难题
自2019年12月以来,随着Covid -19继续肆虐人口,医疗专业人员和来自人类其他知识领域的人员保持清醒,以期将病毒的传播扼杀在萌芽状态。早在2020年1月30日,世卫组织就宣布该病毒为国际关注的突发公共卫生事件和流行病,并不懈努力遏制其传播。然而,这种病毒在全球经济中蚕食了大量财富。当病毒及其变种变成多头病毒时,已经开发出疫苗来降低其发病率和死亡率。接种疫苗被认为是最重要和最成功的公共卫生干预措施之一。尽管如此,在全球部署疫苗以对抗Covid-19的过程中,仍有一些法律障碍需要跨越。个人同意接种疫苗的权利和基本权利有时与公共卫生紧急需要相冲突,导致对特定人口中的每个成员强制接种疫苗。分歧的双方在雅各布森诉马萨诸塞州案和Schloendorff诉纽约医院协会案这两个经典案例中都有各自的法律依据。前者确立了因公共卫生紧急情况而强制接种疫苗的原则,而知情同意和自决原则则源于后者。随后的案例,包括尼日利亚近年来作出的决定,都坚持了医疗中的知情同意和自决原则。本文的主旨是研究冠状病毒疫苗接种和Covid-19身份证书对尼日利亚自决和人权的影响。这篇论文的结论是,有了根深蒂固的信任和透明度,作为反疫苗运动基石的怀疑和不信任就会消失,法律难题也会得到缓解。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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