Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic: the ethics of coercive vaccination policies - where should we draw the line?

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has created unprecedented social, financial, and moral disruptions across the globe despite global efforts to reduce the transmission of the novel coronavirus. Currently, vaccinating populations against COVID-19 has emerged as the most sustainable strategy to help countries recover from the socioeconomic effects of COVID-19 while protecting public health. To meet vaccination targets, some countries have adopted policies that rely on varying levels of coercion. This paper analyses the ethical implications of coercive vaccination policies implemented in Singapore and Italy, which impose barriers to accessing healthcare on the unvaccinated. These two cases are compared to the vaccine mandate in New Zealand, which did not restrict access to healthcare for the unvaccinated. This analysis draws on key considerations from Kass' ethical framework for assessing public health intervention. This analysis is relevant to countries considering similar policies to increase vaccination uptake for infectious diseases. Since healthcare is a fundamental good, a critical question is whether imposing barriers to accessing healthcare services is an ethically justifiable consequence of the choice to remain unvaccinated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]