14 September 2021
I have been asked, following my posts regarding rights and freedoms (see https://beeinbonnet.com/rights-and-obligations/), and living with COVID (see https://beeinbonnet.com/living-with-covid/) whether I am favour of mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. No, I am not, but I am equally adamant that those who elect not to be vaccinated must accept the consequences of their decision and must not be permitted to impose their decision on others around them.
For the sake of transparency, I am fully vaccinated. I accept the general assurances from the scientists behind the development of the vaccine administered to me (AstraZeneca), and more relevantly I have made the assessment that, as an asthmatic, the benefits of vaccination (that is, substantially reduced prospect of becoming gravely ill, and an even lesser chance of dying, should I contract the COVID-19 virus) outweigh substantially the risks of being vaccinated. That goes double (or more) given that each of my wife and daughter themselves have medical conditions which, if they also contracted COVID-19, may endanger their lives. In short, I have made an informed choice, and am perfectly happy with it.
I also support fully the community’s drive to see as much of the population of Australia also fully vaccinated. If much of the country is vaccinated fully, then our hospitals and wider health system will be able to cope with and address those who do become infected with COVID-19, as well as continuing to be meet the community’s demands for other urgent and/or necessary medical treatments. The alternative of just removing restrictions and hoping that herd immunity arises, whether through vaccination or otherwise, simply invites an overwhelmed health system. As a friend said to me recently, ‘I am terrified of the prospect of being left in a trolley in a hospital aisle because there are no beds, or doctors and nurses to treat me’. Me too.
Like everyone else – especially we residents of Melbourne – I know that 70, and then 80, per cent full vaccination means less or no restrictions and re-starting some semblance of normality. It means an end to an experience that damaged everyone’s mental health.
Notwithstanding this, I do not support mandatory vaccination.
Vaccination is an invasive medical treatment. In essence, a vaccination involves the injection into the body of an artificial substance, which is intended to manipulate the elemental parts of that body function. It necessarily changes the way a key system of the body – the immune system – functions. Further, the human body is such an intricate and sensitive organism, there is always the risk that that change to the immune system may result in other unintended and/or adverse changes in other element systems or parts of the body.
Ordinarily, the process of developing a vaccine or other indeed a new medicine requires a long process, not just to assess whether the vaccine or medicine ‘works’, but also to observe any longer-term effects of the vaccine or medicine (good or bad). The general urgency with which the various vaccinations have been developed have meant that that long (or longer) term assessment has not occurred. I acknowledge that, unlike other vaccinations and medicines, the process of developing COVID-19 vaccinations has been accelerated due to the amount of resources, human and financial, that have been devoted to it. However, while this has got us effective vaccines, I am not yet convinced that the scientists can really vouch for the longer-term safety of the vaccines – simply because the testing of the widespread use of the respective vaccines is being done now: the world’s population are participating in testing of the long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccines.
For these reasons, it is legitimate for any individual to say, ‘I am not yet convinced that this vaccination is the right thing for me (my emphasis)’. If we truly believe in society based on individual freedoms, then each individual must be free to choose what medical treatments or procedures he or she undertakes. Our challenge is to advocate, inform, and hopefully encourage, the hold-outs to be vaccinated. If we delegate this choice to governments, corporations, and employers, or allow them to dictate the choice, then we should expect in future to be told how we should look (and to change how we look), how we should behave and how we should feel. I am not inclined to be part of that brave new world.
But if we make a choice, then we must accept not only the responsibility and consequences of that choice, but also that others may make a different choice, for equally legitimate reasons, and they should not necessarily bear the consequences of our choice. The COVID vaccines do not offer a complete shield against the COVID-19 virus. A fully vaccinated individual may still become infected, and may in turn infect others who, if they are not vaccinated may become gravely ill or die.
Therefore, if you choose not to be vaccinated, then I consider that I am within my rights to say that you may not enter my home, workplace, or business, not because I disapprove of your choice, but because your choice means that you may expose any of my loved ones, but especially those who are not fully vaccinated, such as children under 12, either directly, or via, to the disease. If I happen to run a business, then you may expose not only my loved ones, but those of my staff and customers. You may not agree with my choice, and may object to your exclusion, but you cannot expect me to place in danger a greater number of people’s health, just to accommodate your choice on vaccination.
For much the same reason, I am also quite comfortable with the notion that a company may tell an employee that they may not come to work, or that they will not be given work in their chosen position if that employee is not vaccinated. To be clear, however, the employer should not be free to dismiss the employee because he or she refuses to be vaccinated.
On a more macro level, I am also at peace with the government saying that, to a citizen, ‘if you don’t get vaccinated, then you will not enjoy the same freedoms as those who are’. Ultimately, it is about the greater good, which is really what many, if not all, of the public health restrictions, currently in place, are about. It is not about punishment or exclusion; those who make that assertion are playing the victim card but are not accepting the responsibility for the fact that their, perfectly legitimate decision not to be vaccinated, brings with it outcomes that they don’t like or want.
If you go out for the day, and don’t lock up your house because you feel that that is unnecessary or unreasonable, but return to find that all your valuables have been taken, then it is not reasonable to expect that the rest of us should bear the cost of replacing, or procuring the return of, your valuables. Similarly, if you think that ticket prices for the football are unreasonably high if you book online, and therefore won’t do it, then, if the game is a sell-out, your desire to see game shouldn’t trump those people who have decided to spend the money and time securing their tickets. I am not suggesting, in either case, that you ‘deserve’ the consequences of your choice, but it is true that, in each case, you know that your choice carries a risk of those consequences. In deciding to accept that risk, the consequences are yours, and yours alone.
The vaccine issue is no different. Freedom isn’t free; there’s a price to pay.
