Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Mandatory vaccination and the ‘seat belt analogy’ argument

A critical analysis in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic

Bibliographic Data

ID21702579
AuthorsIñigo De Miguel Beriain (0000-0002-2650-5280, Ikerbasque, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume25
Issue2
Pages219-224
Publication date2022-06-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueMedicine Health Care and Philosophy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1386-7423 • E-ISSN: 1572-8633
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s11019-022-10068-1
PMID35132507
OpenAlexW4210389230
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited18

The seat belt analogy argument is aimed at furthering the success of coercive vaccination efforts on the basis that the latter is similar to compulsory use of seat belts. However, this article demonstrated that this argument does not work so well in practice due to several reasons. The possibility of saving resources in health care does not usually apply in our societies, and the paternalist mentality that contributed to the implementation of seat belt–wearing obligation was predominant 30 years ago, but it does not apply at this moment. Furthermore, the risk/benefit analysis is totally different in both scenarios. In the case of seat belts, there is no way to discriminate between the users. In the case of vaccines, individuals present with unique circumstances that may differ substantially from those of another and might be foreseen a priori. This means that an analysis must be performed individually before vaccination is imposed. Finally, one must keep in mind that seat belts are often the only way in which we can protect third parties against a tragic hit by the occupant of another vehicle and are very efficient tools for this purpose. Vaccines, in contrast, do not always create sterilising immunity and are definitely not the only way by which we can avoid spreading a virus; immunity certificates, isolation, or even confinement may also serve as viable methods to achieve this purpose

Analogy · Computer security · Disease · Epistemology · Law and economics · Obligation · Pandemic · Philosophy of medicine · Political science · Seat belt · Sociology · Vaccination · Computer Science · COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing · Engineering · History · Law · Medicine · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy · Virology

  • Vaccination policies and the ethics of risking

    Open Access•Kari Pahlman, Diego S Silva•Monash Bioethics Review•2026

  • The Case against compulsory vaccination

    Open Access•Uwe Steinhoff•Journal of Medical Ethics•2024

  • Fairness with unequal productive skills among other-regarding individuals

    Open Access•Aitor Calo-Blanco•The Journal of Economic Inequality•2024

  • Legal Paternalism

    Open Access•Joel Feinberg•Canadian Journal of Philosophy•1971

  • Seat Belt Mandates and Paternalism

    Jessica Flanigan•Journal of Moral Philosophy•2017

  • Passport to freedom? Immunity passports for Covid-19

    Open Access•Rebecca C H Brown, Julian Savulescu et al.•Journal of Medical Ethics•2020

  • Immunity passports, fundamental rights and public health hazards

    Open Access•Iñigo De Miguel Beriain, Jon Rueda Etxeberria•Journal of Medical Ethics•2020

  • Voluntary Covid-19 vaccination of children

    Open Access•Margherita Brusa, Yechiel Michael Barilan•Journal of Medical Ethics•2021

Unique citing works3
Citations per year1,5
Citation span2024 - 2026 (3)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 3

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae