This formative essay aims to explore the legal and ethical issues of public health as it relates to vaccination. It will examine the moral theories as well as the biomedical principles. However, consequentialism as a moral theory for justification will be the focus of this essay. The essay will then go on to link up the relevant theories to the subject matter which is 'can people be forced to have vaccination?' Finally, a conclusion will be drawn as to why a certain judgement or stand will be taken.
Background.
Public Health, Moral and Ethical Principles.
In the healthcare practice, certain morals and ethical principles govern decision taking for the benefit of a certain population in public health. However, to understand how these judgements or decisions are made it is important to have a clear perspective on the moral theories as well as ethical principles. According to Slowther et al. (2004), moral theories differentiate what is good or bad and are interwoven with ethical principles. Conversely, every society has some laid down moral regulations that form the limitations of suitable behaviour which determines what is good and bad (Hinman, 2012). Similarly, Pattinson (2014) states that moral beliefs vary from individual to individual and society to society. For instance, certain moral regulations that are acceptable in the western world are not permissible in Africa. .
Vaccination and Benefits in Public Health.
Vaccination is usually introduced to an individual or a group of people or population in order to combat infectious diseases and stop outbreaks where necessary; infectious diseases have a huge impact on public health (Krom, 2011). According to the world health organisation (WHO) (2015), vaccination is the process of administering antibodies into the immune system of an individual so as to create resistance against communicable diseases.
