LEGAL ASPECTS OF VACCINATION IN UKRAINE: BETWEEN THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS AND THE INTERESTS OF SOCIETY

T.A. Frantsuz-Yakovets
{"title":"LEGAL ASPECTS OF VACCINATION IN UKRAINE: BETWEEN THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS AND THE INTERESTS OF SOCIETY","authors":"T.A. Frantsuz-Yakovets","doi":"10.31732/2708-339x-2022-04-17-25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article considers human rights issues through the prism of vaccination. The international and national norms, as well as the practice of the ECtHR on human rights in the context of immunization and human responsibilities to the society in which he lives are analyzed. The question of the admissibility of compulsory vaccination is not new, but it is especially relevant in modern conditions. Today, we are all witnessing a situation where the state has created the conditions for stimulating and even forcing vaccination due to the spread of coronavirus infection. A person is faced with a \"choice without a choice\", because it becomes impossible to exercise their basic rights, such as the right to work or the right to free movement, if the person has not received a vaccination certificate. However, such persistent coercion to vaccination in the event of the spread of coronavirus infection is particularly disturbing to some sections of society, as such persistence and agitation for vaccination against other infectious diseases has not been observed. It is determined that the state can use compulsory vaccination, but if there are legal grounds and proportionality. Vaccination must be legal and legitimate. In order to avoid violations of citizens’ rights in practice, clear legislative regulation of the procedural aspect of vaccination is needed. It has been established that both national and international norms indicate that vaccination is a human right that he uses consciously, taking into account all the risks and benefits. A person’s consent to any vaccination is mandatory, so it is unacceptable to use intimidation and coercion in this context. The author argues that a high level of vaccination in society can only be achieved by providing truthful information, establishing responsibility for the consequences of vaccination, which generally contributes to the formation of public confidence in the healthcare system.","PeriodicalId":76144,"journal":{"name":"Medico-legal bulletin","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medico-legal bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31732/2708-339x-2022-04-17-25","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

The article considers human rights issues through the prism of vaccination. The international and national norms, as well as the practice of the ECtHR on human rights in the context of immunization and human responsibilities to the society in which he lives are analyzed. The question of the admissibility of compulsory vaccination is not new, but it is especially relevant in modern conditions. Today, we are all witnessing a situation where the state has created the conditions for stimulating and even forcing vaccination due to the spread of coronavirus infection. A person is faced with a "choice without a choice", because it becomes impossible to exercise their basic rights, such as the right to work or the right to free movement, if the person has not received a vaccination certificate. However, such persistent coercion to vaccination in the event of the spread of coronavirus infection is particularly disturbing to some sections of society, as such persistence and agitation for vaccination against other infectious diseases has not been observed. It is determined that the state can use compulsory vaccination, but if there are legal grounds and proportionality. Vaccination must be legal and legitimate. In order to avoid violations of citizens’ rights in practice, clear legislative regulation of the procedural aspect of vaccination is needed. It has been established that both national and international norms indicate that vaccination is a human right that he uses consciously, taking into account all the risks and benefits. A person’s consent to any vaccination is mandatory, so it is unacceptable to use intimidation and coercion in this context. The author argues that a high level of vaccination in society can only be achieved by providing truthful information, establishing responsibility for the consequences of vaccination, which generally contributes to the formation of public confidence in the healthcare system.
乌克兰疫苗接种的法律方面:在个人权利和社会利益之间
这篇文章从疫苗接种的角度考虑人权问题。分析了国际和国家规范以及欧洲人权委员会在免疫和人对其所生活的社会的责任方面的人权做法。强制性疫苗接种的可接受性问题并不新鲜,但在现代条件下尤为重要。今天,我们都看到,由于冠状病毒感染的蔓延,国家为刺激甚至强制接种疫苗创造了条件。一个人面临着"没有选择的选择",因为如果一个人没有获得疫苗接种证书,就不可能行使其基本权利,例如工作权或自由行动权。然而,在冠状病毒感染蔓延的情况下,这种持续强迫接种疫苗的做法尤其令社会某些阶层感到不安,因为没有观察到这种持续和鼓动接种疫苗以预防其他传染病。它确定国家可以使用强制疫苗接种,但如果有法律依据和比例。接种疫苗必须是合法的。为了避免在实践中侵犯公民权利,需要对疫苗接种的程序方面进行明确的立法规定。已经确定的是,国家和国际规范都表明,疫苗接种是一项人权,他在考虑到所有风险和利益的情况下有意识地加以利用。一个人对任何疫苗接种的同意是强制性的,因此在这种情况下使用恐吓和胁迫是不可接受的。提交人认为,只有通过提供真实的信息,确立对疫苗接种后果的责任,才能在社会上实现高水平的疫苗接种,这通常有助于形成公众对卫生保健系统的信心。
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