Victims, vectors and villains: are those who opt out of vaccination morally responsible for the deaths of others?
Other content recommended for you
- Responsibility in healthcare across time and agents
- How to hold an ethical pox party
- Misled and confused? Telling the public about MMR vaccine safety
- Ethics of vaccine refusal
- A libertarian case for mandatory vaccination
- Spoonful of honey or a gallon of vinegar? A conditional COVID-19 vaccination policy for front-line healthcare workers
- From compulsory to voluntary immunisation: Italy’s National Vaccination Plan (2005–7) and the ethical and organisational challenges facing public health policy-makers across Europe
- Is medically assisted death a special obligation?
- Good reasons to vaccinate: mandatory or payment for risk?
- Vaccine disputes
Jump to comment:
A non-vaccinator is not the culprit for the existence of immunosuppressed persons. Hence, we must use overall and not conditionals probabilities here and pass to the population level. Let’s assume that the prevalence of immunosuppressed persons is 4/10.000 and that measles attack rate is 2/10.000 for the population. Then the probability to observe an immunosuppressed person that gets infected by measles is very low, say 4/10.000 * 2/10.000 = 8 * 10^(-8). The probability to get an encephalitis from measles vaccine is 1 * 10^(-6) and hence more probable.
Risk vs Risk is always problematic and should be avoided.