TY - JOUR
T1 - Mandatory vaccination and no fault vaccine injury compensation schemes
T2 - An identification of country-level policies
AU - Attwell, Katie
AU - Drislane, Shevaun
AU - Leask, Julie
PY - 2019/5/9
Y1 - 2019/5/9
N2 - Background: To prevent the spread of infectious diseases, governments have implemented a number of policies, including a range of mandatory vaccination policies. In addition, some governments have implemented no fault vaccine injury compensation schemes as a legal mechanism of recourse for individuals experiencing adverse events following vaccination. We aimed to identify countries with mandatory vaccination policies that also have no fault compensation schemes. Methods: To identify countries with mandatory childhood vaccination policies, we utilized existing publications, lists and databases, also conducting multiple country searches and policy detail verification. We then investigated compensation schemes for each country with childhood vaccination mandates, using an existing study and database/internet searches. Results: Of the 62 countries we identified with mandatory childhood vaccination policies, we found evidence that only 7 (11%) had also implemented no fault compensation schemes. Conclusions: No-fault compensation schemes are one government approach to address unintended consequences of vaccination. Few countries have implemented these schemes, including those with mandatory vaccination policies. Mandatory vaccination invokes a strong need to protect those who fall victim to extremely rare cases of provable no-fault vaccine injury. Countries that mandate childhood vaccination without providing no fault compensation schemes could be seen as abrogating the social contract. This is particularly important when public policies limit parental choice regarding whether to vaccinate.
AB - Background: To prevent the spread of infectious diseases, governments have implemented a number of policies, including a range of mandatory vaccination policies. In addition, some governments have implemented no fault vaccine injury compensation schemes as a legal mechanism of recourse for individuals experiencing adverse events following vaccination. We aimed to identify countries with mandatory vaccination policies that also have no fault compensation schemes. Methods: To identify countries with mandatory childhood vaccination policies, we utilized existing publications, lists and databases, also conducting multiple country searches and policy detail verification. We then investigated compensation schemes for each country with childhood vaccination mandates, using an existing study and database/internet searches. Results: Of the 62 countries we identified with mandatory childhood vaccination policies, we found evidence that only 7 (11%) had also implemented no fault compensation schemes. Conclusions: No-fault compensation schemes are one government approach to address unintended consequences of vaccination. Few countries have implemented these schemes, including those with mandatory vaccination policies. Mandatory vaccination invokes a strong need to protect those who fall victim to extremely rare cases of provable no-fault vaccine injury. Countries that mandate childhood vaccination without providing no fault compensation schemes could be seen as abrogating the social contract. This is particularly important when public policies limit parental choice regarding whether to vaccinate.
KW - Adverse events
KW - Compensation
KW - Immunization
KW - Mandatory
KW - Policy
KW - Social contract
KW - Vaccination
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064903429&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.03.065
DO - 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.03.065
M3 - Article
C2 - 31000414
AN - SCOPUS:85064903429
SN - 0264-410X
VL - 37
SP - 2843
EP - 2848
JO - Vaccine
JF - Vaccine
IS - 21
ER -