Name
Capella University
PHI FPX 2000
Prof. Name
November, 2024
Contemporary Social Issues
As for modern sciences the subjects of the present focus on contemporary social issues as the multifaceted problems of the present society, which entails ethical questions, cultural disparities as well as systematic injustice. These matters involve multi-party processes where all parties need to find a resolution that would be immeasurable in terms of justice for all parties concerned. One of the most frequent recent phenomena in the medical area is the refusal to be vaccinated, which is also called vaccine hesitancy (Roosen et al., 2021). While vaccines exist for COVID-19 and measles, for example, there is always a section of the population who is reluctant to get vaccinated either through mistrust, false information, or traditions. Ignorance or reluctance to take certain vaccines is now a growing problem due to their ability to effectively reduce or completely negate the achievement of herd immunity. Discussing such a complex problem requires an analysis of its social, ethical, and, medical aspects.
Importance of Vaccination from Multiple Viewpoints
It is well understood that vaccination is one of the most lifesaving measures and decreases millions of deaths yearly. From a healthcare standpoint, vaccines save the lives of individuals and decrease healthcare costs for people (Bjornestad et al., 2020). In the economic aspect, vaccination campaigns generate a high amount back in terms of reduced cost to individuals affected by diseases, hospitalization, and loss of business as a result of being down with the diseases. In the social aspect, it reduces transmission and reinforcement of herd immunity and shields other sensitive groups elder people and immunocompromised that cannot be vaccinated (Chenchula et al., 2022). Ethically, vaccines are obligations for an individual, guaranteeing equal rights for access to lifesaving measures. However, based on the experiences of people who are skeptical of vaccination, negative attitudes concerning the safety, effects, and pharmaceutical companies contribute to the need for better and clearer information dissemination and culturally appropriate qualitative instruction.
Conflicting Perspectives Regarding Vaccination
Vaccination is an issue that when discussed, garners controversy and debate. Vaccine advocates cite originate from research and statistical data; examples include the scientific and societal benefits of immunization such as the global fight against smallpox (Getchell et al., 2023). Against this backdrop, vaccine detractors dismiss absolutely, perceived dangers of side effects and query the integrity of the process of vaccine release. The problem is moreover that cultural and religious considerations also play a role: some groups cannot accept immunization programs based on their sacred customs or principles. This shows that there is a conflict of roles between public health considerations and the rights of people; these two sides have strongly argued their respective stances.
Analysis of Stakeholders’ Interests and Arguments
The stakeholders’ concerns in the vaccination discussion can be significantly different depending on the role and focus. Health-related agencies and various personnel working on health care focus on disease control and the protection of community well-being (Wang et al., 2022). These guidelines support mandatory measures on vaccines and intense health promotion initiatives. Research and development objectives of the pharmaceutical firms help to overcome tendencies connected to the clients’ possible greed and provide safety for using innovative products. Naturally, parents and other opponents of vaccination are inclined to think critically about one’s rights and freedom, side effects, and longer-term consequences of vaccines (Zeinab et al., 2024). These are interests that the policymakers have to reconcile to the end that there will be laws that will suit the common good by protecting the health of communities and at the same time promoting the freedom of individuals. Therefore, any effort to address this controversial issue must fully recognize and cater to these interests.
Insights from Different Academic Disciplines
It proves insightful to view vaccine hesitancy from several theoretical perspectives. Scientific data show that vaccines work and are safe as any myths of severe complications are not supported by science, from the medical point of view (Franco et al., 2020). The sociological perspective of policy points to the significance of negative perceptions and social culture in the vaccination process. Psychological analysis of the problem reveals the psychological reasons for people being afraid of vaccines, for example, the effect of the unknown is terrible. On the other hand, economics stresses the value of vaccination programs in bearing health costs and improving the productivity of human resources. Input from other fields such as ethics and anthropology is also useful in comprehending the ethical reasoning and cultural factors, aspects of vaccination, which we take as a multifaceted system.
Analysis of Vaccination Through Deontology
The first one is the deontological ethics perspective, which is if one believes that getting vaccinated is the right thing to do then the person has to do it. In deontology, the focus is more on the fact that an action is right or wrong regardless of the outcome (Yoon et al., 2023). Applying this theory in the context of vaccination, the theory will claim people must take vaccines to contribute to the protection of public health welfare which is coherent with beneficence and nonmaleficence. Although this speech raises further questions – the act of vaccinations itself is the result of the responsibility towards the people, especially the vulnerable ones, that is granted to every person and every parent when they protect themselves and their children this way. Taking this into consideration, deontological ethics acknowledges the professional responsibility of the healthcare workers to respect patients’ autonomy and their right to make their own decisions regarding treatment, treatment decisions that might sometimes conflict with the perceived well-being of the larger society, a conflict that has to be addressed in the moral theory.
PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 4 Conclusion
By using an example of a current social phenomenon such as anti-vaccination, one can notice that contemporary social problems reflect the difficulties of solving social problems that are tightly connected with one’s health, ethics, and cultural beliefs. It has become apparent that vaccination is an important, indeed fundamental, method of public sanitation; at the same time, different approaches to the problem and various interests demonstrate the importance of achieving an informed consensus and collaboration (Ceban et al., 2023). With the integration of knowledge from different fields and following ethical concerns of deontology society could find the solution, which will serve the health interests of society while respecting the rights of the individuals. The importance of a broad approach that complies with all the fears while, at the same time, advocating people’s necessity to vaccinate for all well-being’s sake cannot be overestimated.
PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 4 References
Bjornestad, J., McKay, J. R., Berg, H., Moltu, C., & Nesvåg, S. (2020). How often are outcomes other than change in substance use measured? A systematic review of outcome measures in contemporary randomised controlled trials. Drug and Alcohol Review, 39(4), 394–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.13051
Chenchula, S., Karunakaran, P., Sharma, S., & Chavan, M. (2022). Current evidence on efficacy of COVID-19 booster dose vaccination against the Omicron variant: A systematic review. Journal of Medical Virology, 94(7), 2969–2976. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27697
Ceban, F., Kulzhabayeva, D., Rodrigues, N. B., Di Vincenzo, J. D., Gill, H., Subramaniapillai, M., Lui, L. M. W., Cao, B., Mansur, R. B., Ho, R. C., Burke, M. J., Rhee, T. G., Rosenblat, J. D., & McIntyre, R. S. (2023). COVID-19 vaccination for the prevention and treatment of long COVID: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 111, 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2023.03.022
Franco, L., Fernandez, F., Martínez, F., Benrimoj, S. I., & Sabater-Hernández, D. (2020). Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review. Health Policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 124(10), 1083–1099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.06.012
Getchell, M., Mantaring, E. J., Yee, K., & Pronyk, P. (2023). Cost-effectiveness of sub-national geographically targeted vaccination programs: A systematic review. Vaccine, 41(14), 2320–2328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.02.006
Roosen, I., Salway, S., & Osei-Kwasi, H. A. (2021). Transnational social networks, health, and care: a systematic narrative literature review. International Journal for Equity In Health, 20(1), 138. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01467-6
Wang, S., Su, F., Ye, L., & Jing, Y. (2022). Disinformation: A bibliometric review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(24), 16849. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416849
Yoon, S., Lee, M., Jung, H. I., Khan, M. M., Kim, S. Y., Kim, H., & Wasti, S. (2023). Prioritization of research engaged with rare disease stakeholders: a systematic review and thematic analysis. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 18(1), 363. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-023-02892-2
Zeinab, D., Shahin, N., Fateme, M., & Saeed, B. F. (2024). Economic evaluation of vaccination against COVID-19: A systematic review. Health Science Reports, 7(2), e1871. https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.1871
