A Scalar Approach to Vaccination Ethics.

Area of Science:

• Bioethics
• Public Health Ethics
• Moral Philosophy

Background:

• The ethical justification for vaccination, particularly concerning obligations to others, remains a complex issue.
• Existing frameworks often present vaccination duties as binary, lacking nuance for varying individual circumstances and vaccine efficacy.
• Understanding the moral basis for vaccination is crucial for public health policy and individual decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

• To propose a reasons-based consequentialist account for understanding vaccination obligations towards others.
• To identify specific factors influencing the strength of moral reasons for vaccination.
• To develop a scalar approach to vaccination ethics, moving beyond binary duty frameworks.

Main Methods:

• Development of a novel ethical framework grounded in consequentialism and reasons-based morality.
• Identification and analysis of eight harm-based and probabilistic factors relevant to vaccination decisions.
• Application of the framework to a case study of COVID-19 vaccination.

Main Results:

• The study outlines a scalar approach where moral reasons for vaccination can be stronger or weaker, rather than a simple 'duty' or 'no duty'.
• Eight specific factors are identified as contributing to the moral justification for vaccination.
• The framework demonstrates how different vaccines or individual circumstances can alter the strength of moral reasons.

Conclusions:

• A reasons-based consequentialist model offers a more nuanced understanding of vaccination ethics than binary duty-based approaches.
• This scalar framework provides a practical tool for evaluating moral reasons for vaccination in diverse contexts, including COVID-19.
• The approach supports tailored public health recommendations by accounting for varying levels of moral obligation.