{"title":"The Difficulties in Implementing the Compulsory Vaccination Regulation to Vaccine Opponents During the Reign of Abdülhamid II","authors":"H. Sari, Hatice Nil Sari","doi":"10.5336/mdethic.2022-92453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABS TRACT With the vaccination regulations published successively in 1885, 1894 and 1904 the legal framework of the compulsory smallpox vaccination was drawn. The aim of this study is to determine from the archive documents of the period the difficulty faced by the government in the application of compulsory vaccination and the official ap- proach to the solution of vaccine opposition. Official writings between 1885-1905 in the context of resolving the opposition to vaccination were searched for in the Prime Ministry Ottoman archives. Auxiliary sources were consulted for the interpretation of the expressions. With the aim of resolving opposition to mandatory vaccination, support was requested from religious community leaders; the benefits of the vac- cine was publicized through newspapers; residents of every district were encouraged to report those who are not vaccinated to the official authorities. One of the biggest problems faced was that children were not vaccinated. Some of those who did not want to be vaccinated even changed their address. The applicability of the penalties foreseen in the regulations for those who do not get vaccinated was the main subject of discussion. By 1905, opposition to vaccination seems to have continued in certain regions of Istanbul. From an ethical point of view, compul- sory vaccination aimed to protect public health conflicted with the will of those who were against the vaccine. However, it was noticed during the implementation process that the penalties stipulated in the regulation for those who do not want to be vaccinated do not guarantee vac- cination.","PeriodicalId":91422,"journal":{"name":"Turkiye klinikleri. Tip etigi-hukuku-tarihi = Turkiye klinikleri journal of medical ethics, law, and history","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkiye klinikleri. Tip etigi-hukuku-tarihi = Turkiye klinikleri journal of medical ethics, law, and history","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5336/mdethic.2022-92453","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
ABS TRACT With the vaccination regulations published successively in 1885, 1894 and 1904 the legal framework of the compulsory smallpox vaccination was drawn. The aim of this study is to determine from the archive documents of the period the difficulty faced by the government in the application of compulsory vaccination and the official ap- proach to the solution of vaccine opposition. Official writings between 1885-1905 in the context of resolving the opposition to vaccination were searched for in the Prime Ministry Ottoman archives. Auxiliary sources were consulted for the interpretation of the expressions. With the aim of resolving opposition to mandatory vaccination, support was requested from religious community leaders; the benefits of the vac- cine was publicized through newspapers; residents of every district were encouraged to report those who are not vaccinated to the official authorities. One of the biggest problems faced was that children were not vaccinated. Some of those who did not want to be vaccinated even changed their address. The applicability of the penalties foreseen in the regulations for those who do not get vaccinated was the main subject of discussion. By 1905, opposition to vaccination seems to have continued in certain regions of Istanbul. From an ethical point of view, compul- sory vaccination aimed to protect public health conflicted with the will of those who were against the vaccine. However, it was noticed during the implementation process that the penalties stipulated in the regulation for those who do not want to be vaccinated do not guarantee vac- cination.