Ethics of a Coronavirus Vaccine
By Angela Zhang ‘23
You finally hear some good news: there is a coronavirus vaccine! Things can go back to normal! Everyone can be protected, and there is no need for social distancing or any of the newly implemented guidelines and protocols.
But we all know it’s not that simple. Even when a vaccine is ready, everyone still needs to be cautious and not gamble with their health. Sanitization is still key to preventing outbreaks, though a vaccine will certainly be of immense help. But how safe and effective is it? Will some need it more than others? Which administration practices are ethical and which are not? The list of questions goes on…
In the event that a vaccine (with a high efficacy rate) is readily available for administering, the Academy should undoubtedly require all of its faculty and staff to receive the vaccine. The coronavirus is no joke, as we all know. To exempt certain students or faculty from the vaccine and not take all the precautions and measures necessary to prevent the contraction and spread of this virus would be beyond foolish.
The argument from religious freedom—wherein certain religions forbid or avoid receiving vaccines—is an important one, but one I argue should not be honored in this situation. Most religions don’t prohibit the use of vaccinations anyway, and most understand the purpose of this vaccination is a necessary measure for protecting other humans, especially because the coronavirus has such a high transmission rate. We all know that no vaccine has 100% efficacy, after all, so it’s vital to get as close to full coverage as we can. Even the best vaccines will not guarantee total safety from the virus, and it would be incredibly unfair and selfish to place other people in danger because one person did not receive the vaccination, for religious or other reasons.
However, the Academy should not push for and mandate a vaccine until it is deemed absolutely safe by trustworthy organizations such as the World Health Organization or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It would be irresponsible to administer a vaccine with possible adverse effects, and it would be safer to just stick to the precautionary guidelines and protocols implemented right now—at least until we have some measure of certainty that a vaccine is the real deal. There is no guarantee of our safety, and we cannot simply just listen to the first news source available regarding the safety of the vaccines. After all, if we did that, Exeter students might have rushed to get the dangerous and disproven hydroxychloroquine treatment. It is absolutely necessary to be patient and wait for a reliable source to inform us.
But what if the supply of vaccines is limited? Should it be administered only to a certain group? Administered at all? In that scenario, vaccines should be administered to the people who are at the most risk for contracting it. This would include but is not limited to people of greater age, people with comorbidities or people with weak lungs. Those who need it most, in and beyond our community, should be prioritized. After all, we need to remember that not everyone is affected equally, and we should all wait our turn if it means protecting the lives of the old and immunocompromised.
Currently, the whole world is anxiously waiting for the arrival of a safe and effective vaccine. When that time comes, even more ethical questions will rise, and there will unfortunately have to be difficult decisions if there are not enough vaccines for everyone. It may feel like a vaccine is the solution to all our pandemic problems, but we must understand that no vaccine is a magical solution. We will still face transmission risks, deaths and other issues, quite similar to how our society now handles the flu. With that being said, it is our duty, not only as students at the Academy, but as global citizens, to respect and perform all necessary measures and take care of one another’s health. We can get through it together, no matter how much longer we need to wait for the vaccine.