Mandatory vaccinations represent an ethical dilemma. In order to understand this, let us review the four ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress (2001): autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. The principle of autonomy entails respect for a person’s wishes – to allow a person to make meaningful decisions having an adequate level of understanding and without the control of others. The principle of beneficence is to promote good and the related principle of non-maleficence is to prevent harm. The principle of justice requires a fair distribution of resources in society. Beauchamp and Childress do not claim that these principles provide a theory of morality, but they should be used to reflect on ethical challenges so an appropriate resolution to those challenges can be achieved. …show more content…
Eradication of terrible diseases, such as polio, rabies or smallpox, is a direct result of vaccination and herd immunity. Consequently, the principle of beneficence suggests that mandatory vaccinations are in the best interests of society. Unfortunately, this requires that individuals sacrifice their autonomy – their ability to decide something as fundamental as what goes inside their own body – for the overall good. Moreover, the principle of autonomy is frequently violated when physicians fail to provide all the facts regarding any proposed vaccine so the patient can offer informed consent. For example, a recent survey indicated that most physicians tell patients that HPV vaccines are an important cervical cancer prevention tool, where recent clinical trials show no evidence to support that claim (Tomljenovic & Shaw,