The Complaints of the Willfully Unvaccinated

Considering intentions to decide the ethics of an action

Carlos Garbiras graciously invited me to give a philosophical response to his article, “Vaccines Are For Winners Only.” Carlos expressed interest in “the communication and the power dynamics behind the vaccine debate.” I had been meaning for some time to do a follow-up to my 2020 article on how to think about those people refusing mask mandates. I am grateful to Carlos for giving me the push to follow through.

The Ethical Question of COVID Vaccine Hesitancy

The environment of this issue is simple enough. There is a pandemic caused by a virus that is highly communicable and has killed millions of people. There are, in some countries, widely available vaccines that have been proven to reduce the severity and mortality of COVID infections. Despite these facts, some people are choosing not to receive a COVID vaccine.

The ethical issue is how we are to think about the people who willfully choose not to get vaccinated against the COVID virus. It should be clearly stated that no one deserves to be attacked for their choices. There is no justification for harassing or bullying those who refuse the vaccine. Everyone has the right to be treated with basic human dignity. However, everyone also deserves to face consequences for their actions, and that is a fact we need to keep in mind.

When thinking about ethical questions, we must consider people’s intentions — the reasons behind their choices. The reasons people give to refuse to be vaccinated can be separated into personal reasons and political reasons. Personal reasons include having health contraindication and having a fear of injections or medications. Political reasons include partisan political affairs, but also ideological reasons. These are two different sets of reasons and intentions behind the reasons and require different ethical considerations.

If a person has a legitimate medical reason not to be vaccinated, that is a reason everyone should accept, and indeed medicine and governments do accept this. If there is a personal fear or reluctance, those people deserve to be treated with respect and kindness. Few of us are thrilled with the idea of undergoing a number of medical procedures, and these fears and the people who have them deserve mature discussion. Hesitancy is not obstinacy.

The Dark Side of COVID Vaccine Refusal

Political reasons for refusing the vaccine are of a different character: they are anti-vax obstinacy, not simply vaccine hesitancy. There are different types and levels of such anti-vax intentions. Refusing the vaccine simply out of opposition to the political party currently in power is not a legitimate reason. Hopefully, no one is that simpleminded. Most objections to the vaccine and vaccine mandates are based on preexisting political ideology. Some are fairly simpleminded of the, “you can’t tell me what to do” variety from people who also think they shouldn’t be held to a whole spate of social obligations, including paying taxes.

There is an anti-social aspect to the anti-vax position. Individual rights matter, but not at the denial of the rights of others. Everyone has a legitimate personal interest not to get sick and die from COVID. Not being vaccinated, but still mingling with other people, violates the interests of people who do not want to be endangered by the COVID virus. To place your personal desires at a preeminent stature such that the welfare of others is ignored is the definition of anti-social behavior, and it is unethical.

The more serious ethical issue related to political reasons for vaccine refusal is when anti-vax intentions are a social crusade far beyond personal concerns. We are seeing anti-vaxxers engaging in bullying, derision, and harassment against people who choose to be vaccinated. Anti-vaxxers are pressuring individuals and organizations to stop promoting vaccinations against COVID or admit their vaccination status. People who willfully choose to be vaccinated against the COVID virus deserve to be treated with respect and kindness. The ideological anti-vaxxers have forgotten that no one deserves to be attacked for their choices.

One ideological reason given for vaccine refusal is the claim that “vaccine passports” are a form of suppression or discrimination. Are they? Suppression and discrimination are instances of coercion or denial of someone else’s free actions. This is the apparent claim of the anti-vaxxers, that they are being coerced into being vaccinated and that they are being discriminated against for their refusal to be vaccinated. Let’s look at these claims.

First, let’s refute the argument that “vaccine passports” are governments “forcing” people to get the vaccine. “Forced” implies that you are being threatened with violence or imprisonment. No. You are being given a choice of if you wish to do certain things you need to first do something. Similar choices are if you want to drive a car, you need to pass a driving test. And anarchist/libertarian claims that drivers’ licenses are some sort of infringement on “personal liberties” are inadmissible because such claims inherently deny the legitimate personal interest not to be harmed by other people’s actions. For example, your right to drive a car is contingent upon your respect for the rights of others not to be unduly endangered by you driving. The same applies to the legitimate interests of people not to be infected with the COVID virus.

…and Even Darker

Then there are the alternative health mongers. For years, these people have been selling conspiracy theories against accepted medical treatments with a side of “buy this supplement from us instead.” It is no surprise that these con artists shifted their message of “don’t trust doctors, trust us” to include the COVID pandemic. These hucksters had a well-honed message and a built-in audience for it. For the fake experts, the pandemic was a new source of income — the health crisis of the century was a gift that keeps on giving. Their intentions behind their anti-vax messages are in no way honorable.

From the alternative health mongers, we morph into a range of conspiracy theorists spreading disinformation about COVID and the vaccines. We’ve seen conspiracy theories about COVID mutate from it’s a hoax, to it’s caused by 5G, to it’s a ploy to sell vaccines, to it’s an excuse to impose a new world order, and on and on. We’ve seen some of these conspiracy theories time and again about other issues, now they’ve been tailored to fit the new target of COVID. Conspiracy theories have a basic structure and methodology: a core lie disseminated by a small group of con(spiracy) artists to a gaggle of earnest meaning seekers eager to believe the lie. The pandemic has been made to fit into a slew of right-wing conspiracy theories. The common denominator of the COVID conspiracy theories is to sow distrust and hostility toward vaccine programs and those people who choose to be vaccinated.

To what end? The usual right-wing political agendas. The power dynamic behind much of the anti-vax sentiment has nothing to do with the pandemic or the vaccine. People are exploiting the pandemic to push anti-government and anti-social agendas. Freedom of expression does not entitle people to spread disinformation or endanger other people, but this is what we are seeing from some anti-vaxxers.

The Ethical Bottom Line

The intentions behind an action are important in assessing whether they are ethical or not. Malicious intentions are inherently unethical. Personal reasons for vaccine hesitancy are usually not malicious, they are either practical or a misunderstanding. Again, legitimate health contraindications need to be respected, as do hesitancy caused by apprehension or lack of understanding. Malicious reasons to oppose the vaccine do not deserve respect beyond the basic respect for another human being that is unconditional. Respect the person but not the malicious actions and intentions. We need to take actions on a case-by-case basis, but political reasons to oppose vaccinations tend to be malicious, and the people behind attempts to prevent vaccinations are behaving unethically.

It is a legitimate public interest that fewer people get sick and die from COVID. Governments and the medical industry are ethically obligated to protect people from the dangers posed by the COVID pandemic. Yes, governments can overstep their responsibilities, but that is not the case anywhere. If anything, governments are not doing enough to mitigate the spread of the COVID virus. The protestations of the anti-vaxxers have been heard and they are unconvincing.

The science is clear and unequivocal: vaccines are safe and effective and COVID restrictions diminish the spread of the disease. Arguments to the contrary are the logical equivalent to arguing the Earth is flat. Wild conspiracy theories or general intransigence do not require everyone else to accept circumstances in which they are less safe.

Is there a right to endanger and even kill oneself? One could argue for one. In which case, yes, if you want to refuse the vaccine, go ahead, but be adult enough to accept the consequences of your choice. People should not harass you for your choice. However, there is no right to endanger and even kill someone else. If you don’t want to take a driving test, you don’t get to drive a car in public. If you refuse the vaccine, you don’t get to endanger others.

It’s a simple set of decisions and consequences that any functioning adult can understand. You did not get to do whatever you want and never face any consequences for it. That’s not how reality works. If you refuse the vaccine, you have to face the consequences of not being allowed to endanger other people. The choice is yours, and as long as you respect others who choose to be vaccinated and keep each other safe, and don’t try to exploit the pandemic for political purposes, then we’re good.

For another philosopher’s response to this issue, look at Wei Xiang’s “Should We Just Let the Unvaccinated Die?”