Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Journal of Medical Ethics 2003;29:22-26; doi:10.1136/jme.29.1.22
Copyright © 2003 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Institute of Medical Ethics.
J Med Ethics 2003;29:22-26
© 2003 BMJ Publishing Group & Institute of Medical Ethics

SYMPOSIUM ON CONSENT AND CONFIDENTIALITY

Misled and confused? Telling the public about MMR vaccine safety

C J Clements1 and S Ratzan2

1 Department of Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
2 US Agency for International Development, Washington, USA

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr C J Clements, Department of Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland;
clementscj{at}who.ch

The extraordinary events surrounding the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine in the United Kingdom have not only placed in jeopardy the use of this triple vaccine but have also spread concern to other parts of the world. Examination of the public’s worry about MMR vaccine reveals they have been exposed to a range of conflicting views resulting in the feeling of having been misled about the safety of the vaccine. There are various groups and individuals who have legitimate roles in informing the public about such subjects. But is each one behaving in an ethically responsible way? And if confidence falters, vaccine coverage dips, and an outbreak of measles, mumps, or rubella ensues, who, if anyone, will stand and say "I misled them, I confused them, this is my responsibility"? We examine the ethical issues of each group with a voice in the debate about vaccine safety.

Keywords: MMR vaccine; vaccine safety; public health; immunisation; WHO


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Clarke, C. E. (2008). A Question of Balance: The Autism-Vaccine Controversy in the British and American Elite Press. Science Communication 30: 77-107 [Abstract]  
  • Mishra, G., Kok, H., Ecob, R., Cooper, R., Hardy, R., Kuh, D. (2006). Cessation of Hormone Replacement Therapy After Reports of Adverse Findings From Randomized Controlled Trials: Evidence From a British Birth Cohort. Am. J. Public Health 96: 1219-1225 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • McGreevy, D. (2005). Risks and benefits of the single versus the triple MMR vaccine: how can health professionals reassure parents?. The Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health 125: 84-86 [Abstract]  
  • Wood-Harper, J. (2005). Informing Education Policy on MMR: balancing individual freedoms and collective responsibilities for the promotion of public health. Nurs Ethics 12: 43-58 [Abstract]  
  • Messer, N G (2004). Professional-patient relationships and informed consent. Postgrad. Med. J. 80: 277-283 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.