TY - JOUR
T1 - Compulsory vaccination and conscientious or philosophical exemptions
T2 - Past, present, and future
AU - Salmon, Daniel A.
AU - Teret, Stephen P.
AU - MacIntyre, C. Raina
AU - Salisbury, David
AU - Burgess, Margaret A.
AU - Halsey, Neal A.
N1 - Funding Information:
N A Halsey receives research grant support through his employer, Johns Hopkins University, for studies of vaccine safety and effectiveness from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Sanofi Pasteur. Although D Salisbury is employed by the UK Department of Health, the views expressed in this paper are his and not necessarily those of the Department of Health. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
PY - 2006/2/4
Y1 - 2006/2/4
N2 - Compulsory vaccination has contributed to the success of immunisation programmes in the USA and Australia, yet the benefits from compulsory vaccination are not universally recognised. Some people - experts and the public alike - believe that the benefits of compulsory vaccination are outweighed by the associated ethical problems. A review of vaccination legislation in the UK, Australia, and the USA raises four main points. First, compulsory vaccination may be effective in preventing disease outbreaks, reaching and sustaining high immunisation coverage rates, and expediting the introduction of new vaccines. Second, to be effective, compulsory programmes must have a reliable supply of safe and effective vaccines and most people must be willing to be vaccinated. Third, allowance of exemptions to compulsory vaccination may limit public backlash. Finally, compulsory vaccination may increase the burden on governments to ensure the safety of vaccines. Nevertheless, although compulsory immunisation can be very effective, it might not be acceptable in some countries where high coverage has been achieved through other approaches or efforts, such as in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the UK. These factors should be considered when compulsory vaccinations are being introduced or immunisation laws refined. Lessons learned from compulsory vaccination could be useful to other public-health programmes.
AB - Compulsory vaccination has contributed to the success of immunisation programmes in the USA and Australia, yet the benefits from compulsory vaccination are not universally recognised. Some people - experts and the public alike - believe that the benefits of compulsory vaccination are outweighed by the associated ethical problems. A review of vaccination legislation in the UK, Australia, and the USA raises four main points. First, compulsory vaccination may be effective in preventing disease outbreaks, reaching and sustaining high immunisation coverage rates, and expediting the introduction of new vaccines. Second, to be effective, compulsory programmes must have a reliable supply of safe and effective vaccines and most people must be willing to be vaccinated. Third, allowance of exemptions to compulsory vaccination may limit public backlash. Finally, compulsory vaccination may increase the burden on governments to ensure the safety of vaccines. Nevertheless, although compulsory immunisation can be very effective, it might not be acceptable in some countries where high coverage has been achieved through other approaches or efforts, such as in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the UK. These factors should be considered when compulsory vaccinations are being introduced or immunisation laws refined. Lessons learned from compulsory vaccination could be useful to other public-health programmes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=31844454744&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=31844454744&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68144-0
DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68144-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 16458770
AN - SCOPUS:31844454744
SN - 0140-6736
VL - 367
SP - 436
EP - 442
JO - Lancet
JF - Lancet
IS - 9508
ER -