Prioritizing Parental Liberty in Non-medical Vaccine Exemption Policies: A Response to Giubilini, Douglas and Savulescu

Public Health Ethics 10 (3) (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a recent paper published in this journal, Giubilini, Douglas and Savulescu argue that we have given insufficient weight to the moral importance of fairness in our account of the best policies for non-medical exemptions to childhood immunization requirements. They advocate for a type of policy they call Contribution, according to which parents must contribute to important public health goods before their children can receive NMEs to immunization requirements. In this response, we argue that Giubilini, Douglas and Savulescu give insufficient weight to the moral importance parental liberty in ways that count against their preferred type of NMEs policy and threaten public support for mandatory vaccination laws and public health initiatives generally.

Similar books and articles

Resisting Moral Permissiveness about Vaccine Refusal.Mark Navin - 2013 - Public Affairs Quarterly 27 (1):69-85.
Procreative beneficence – cui Bono?Jakob Elster - 2009 - Bioethics 25 (9):482-488.
Procreative Beneficence, Obligation, and Eugenics.Robert Sparrow - 2007 - Genomics, Society and Policy 3 (3):43-59.
The moral significance of being born.Neil Levy - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (5):326-329.
Savulescu's objections to the future of value argument.Don Marquis - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (2):119-122.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-14

Downloads
1,591 (#6,567)

6 months
103 (#43,620)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?