Neel Kothari questions the morality of mandatory vaccination, citing the government’s strategy to force COVID-19 vaccinations on NHS staff.
It’s bizarre to think that the COVID-19 pandemic was only four years ago.
It was a scary time for many filled, with uncertainty over what was happening across the world. There was also concern for our own future, and that of our families and how they would be affected.
For many of us, me included, it was a huge relief to know that the vaccines were eventually on their way so that we had a way out of the chaos we were in.
‘Cunning strategy’
Many will recall MPs approving mandatory vaccinations for NHS and social care staff, only to withdraw the requirement weeks before deadline day.
In what now seems like a cunning strategy, this allowed the government to avoid accusations of forcing vaccinations, while at the same time strongly encouraging healthcare workers to uptake the vaccine by leveraging their careers should they choose not to.
Healthcare worker Steve James, a consultant anaesthetist at King’s College Hospital, publicly told the then health secretary Sajid Javid why he did not believe he needed a vaccination, citing his acquired immunity while working in the frontline of the NHS.
Some applauded his forthright stance, but there is no doubt that many sought to criticise his view as reckless and dangerous. In hindsight, he made a very sound argument, yet at the time he was demonised for doing so.
Pro-vaccines versus sceptics
As time went on, the discourse became less about the science and more about the morality of the decision, which polarised people into those who were pro-vaccination and those who were sceptical.
Tony Blair was famously quoted as saying: ‘If you’re not vaccinated at the moment, you’re not just irresponsible, you’re an idiot.’ No doubt he genuinely believed this, but with the benefit of hindsight, was he right? And with the benefit of hindsight, would he have said this again
I personally chose to be vaccinated, but felt an unease over the way our medical and dental colleagues who opted out were treated. Sure, I disagreed with several arguments I often heard, but that’s not the point.
Opting out of a medical intervention is a wholly legitimate position that ought to be respected in a free and open society and certainly should not be overridden by politicians. Can any of our professional organisations truly say that they stood up and defended our colleagues’ legitimate right to choose? And would they take the same view if we took a similar paternalistic approach with our patients’ care?
Coercive vaccinations
Writing for Georgetown Law Faculty in 1982, Laurence Gostlin states: ‘There can be no greater intrusion on a competent human being than to compel him to receive physical treatment that he does not want.’
This is a notable difference from the Hippocratic Oath (commonly referred to as guiding principles), which places a greater influence on a physician’s duty to act in the patient’s best interest, assuming physicians know best.
To be clear, I’m not seeking to debate the merits of the COVID vaccination. I have personal views on this, but they are also irrelevant. My concern is that mandating vaccinations is not without consequence.
It’s well documented that coercive vaccination measures lead to an increase in vaccine hesitancy. For example, a 2017 study in Europe noted that mandatory childhood vaccination laws led to increased resistance in certain communities, particularly when individuals perceived the mandates as government overreach.
While proponents of mandatory vaccinations purport its necessity for ‘the greater good’, it’s hard to see how this could be the case if healthcare workers themselves increasingly develop hesitancy in response to coercion. Further, it presumes that necessity is a settled issue, which is far from the case with those that are sceptical.
Bad science meets politics
In my opinion, mandating vaccinations (despite its later reversal) is likely to have caused more harm than good. As a sector, we ended up losing a significant number of our members at a time when recruiting staff was already an issue. Further, this instilled distrust within countless others who have remained.
On a wider point, in my opinion our population also developed high levels of scepticism about vaccinations which could lead to unforeseen consequences, such as a potential increase in anti-fluoride views within the public.
Perhaps this assertion is a leap too far, but if we had a new global pandemic soon, I am convinced that we cannot expect a high level of compliance from both the public and healthcare workers and this particularly worrying.
My biggest criticism of how mandatory vaccinations were handled during the COVID pandemic was that we allowed ourselves to be governed by bad science tainted by politics and that we tacitly went along with the status quo.
I don’t think of those who chose not to be vaccinated as ‘idiots’, and I certainly don’t think anaesthetist Steve James was unwise for making what now looks like eminently sensible arguments.
Read more from Neel Kothari:
- Are universities adequately preparing new dentists?
- Why we need more regulation from the GDC
- What can NHS dentistry expect from the upcoming election?
- Why we need to bring back dental reference officers
- Has dental nurses’ registration been a success?
Follow Dentistry.co.uk on Instagram to keep up with all the latest dental news and trends.
