<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">RUDN Journal of Sociology</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">RUDN Journal of Sociology</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Социология</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2313-2272</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2408-8897</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumamba</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">29617</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22363/2313-2272-2021-21-4-755-768</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Contemporary society: the urgent issues and prospects for development</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Современное общество: актуальные проблемы и перспективы развития</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Compulsory vaccination: Public benefit or individual’s right limitation</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Обязательная вакцинация: социальное благо или нарушение индивидуальных прав</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Yastrebov</surname><given-names>O. A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Ястребов</surname><given-names>Олег Александрович</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>доктор юридических наук, заведующий кафедрой административного и финансового права юридического института Российского университета дружбы народов, ректор РУДН</p></bio><email>rector@rudn.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">RUDN University</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Российский университет дружбы народов</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2021-12-07" publication-format="electronic"><day>07</day><month>12</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>21</volume><issue>4</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en">VOL 21, NO4 (2021)</issue-title><issue-title xml:lang="ru">ТОМ 21, №4 (2021)</issue-title><fpage>755</fpage><lpage>768</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2021-12-07"><day>07</day><month>12</month><year>2021</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2021, Yastrebov O.A.</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2021, Ястребов О.А.</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2021</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Yastrebov O.A.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Ястребов О.А.</copyright-holder><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/><license><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</ali:license_ref></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.rudn.ru/sociology/article/view/29617">https://journals.rudn.ru/sociology/article/view/29617</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p style="text-align: justify;">Mass vaccination and its controversial assessments have become key issues under the covid-19 pandemic. Outbreaks of diseases and popularity of anti-vaccination movements require a study of legal foundations for medical interventions and freedom restrictions which are considered as the result of serious risks to health and sanitary-epidemiological well-being of the population. The question is what should be prioritized - paternalistic powers of the state or individual rights and freedoms to decide what risks to take. In terms of responsibility distribution, people often consider vaccines as more dangerous than infectious diseases [17], which makes compulsory vaccination a legal phenomenon of particular importance. In the contemporary legislation, there are various national approaches to the individual autonomy and freedoms. In some countries, vaccination is directly linked to the possibility to study (USA), in others it is associated with ‘public health’ (Australia), financial sanctions (Poland) or freedoms’ limitations (Pakistan). In terms of public health ethics, vaccination is similar to the use of seat-belts in cars, and compulsory vaccination policy is ethically justified by the same reasons as mandatory seat-belt laws [8]: at first, they were met with great opposition; later the use of seat belts acquired the significance of not only a legal but also a social norm precisely because it was made mandatory [1]. The similar approach is applicable to vaccination: the policy of compulsory vaccination can make it a social norm. However, in the legal perspective, compulsory vaccination is a compulsory medical intervention which raises the question about whether it is possible to limit individual rights and freedoms in the name of public health safety. The article considers contradictory issues in the state policy of compulsory vaccination and its legal support. The author presents a definition of compulsory vaccination, identifies its types, describes the specifics of its national legal regulation and sanctions for the refusal to be vaccinated, and explains its social necessity and expediency as a public good.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p style="text-align: justify;">Массовая вакцинация и ее противоречивые оценки оказались в центре общественного внимания в условиях пандемии коронавируса. Вспышки заболеваний и широкое распространение движения против вакцин требуют изучения правовых основ медицинского вмешательства и ограничения свобод, которые стали результатом признания серьезных рисков для здравоохранения и санитарно-эпидемиологического благополучия населения. Проблема сводится к расстановке приоритетов - что важнее: патерналистская власть государства или индивидуальные права и свобода решать, на какой риск идти. С точки зрения распределения ответственности люди часто воспринимают вакцины как нечто более опасное, чем сами инфекционные заболевания [17], что и объясняет важность рассмотрения обязательной вакцинации как правового феномена. В современном законодательстве оформились разные подходы к трактовке личных свобод. Одни страны напрямую увязывают вакцинацию с возможностью обучения (США), другие - скорее со «здравоохранением» (Австралия), финансовыми ограничениями (Польша) или ограничением свобод (Пакистан). С точки зрения этики здравоохранения вакцинация схожа с использованием ремней безопасности в автомобиле, т.е. обязательная вакцинация объясняется теми же причинами, что и требование пристегиваться [8]: сначала оно было воспринято резко негативно, но затем стало не только законодательной, но и социальной нормой благодаря своей обязательности [1]. Схожий подход применим к вакцинации: меры обязательной вакцинации могут превратить ее в социальную норму. Однако с юридической точки зрения обязательная вакцинация - это принудительное медицинское вмешательство, порождающее вопрос об ограничении индивидуальных прав и свобод во имя сохранения общественного здоровья. В статье рассмотрены противоречивые аспекты государственной политики обязательной вакцинации и ее нормативное обоснование. Автор предлагает определение обязательной вакцинации, определяет ее типы, описывает особенности ее законодательного обеспечения в разных странах и санкции за отказ от вакцинации, объясняет ее социальную необходимость и целесообразность как общественного блага.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>vaccination</kwd><kwd>compulsory vaccination</kwd><kwd>public interest</kwd><kwd>individual rights and freedoms</kwd><kwd>restriction of rights and freedoms</kwd><kwd>private life</kwd><kwd>public health</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>вакцинация</kwd><kwd>обязательная вакцинация</kwd><kwd>общественные интересы</kwd><kwd>индивидуальные права и свободы</kwd><kwd>ограничение прав и свобод</kwd><kwd>частная жизнь</kwd><kwd>здравоохранение</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Adams J. The Efficacy of Seat Belt Legislation. SAE; 1982.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>Bajekal N. German biologist who denied measles exists ordered to pay more than 100,000. Time World; 2015, March 13.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Bozzola E., Spina G., Russo R. et al. Mandatory vaccinations in European countries, undocumented information, false news and the impact on vaccination uptake: The position of the Italian pediatric society. Italian Journal of Pediatrics. 2018; 44.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Chervenak F.A., McCullough L.B., Brent R.L. Professional responsibility and early childhood vaccination. Journal of Pediatrics. 2016; 169.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Covid-19 and mandatory vaccination: Ethical considerations and caveats. URL: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-Policy-brief-Mandatory-vaccination-2021.1.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>DePasquale S. Childhood immunizations and the role of a county department of social services. Juvenile Law Bulletin. 2015; 1.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Giubilini A. The Ethics of Vaccination. London; 2019.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Giubilini A., Savulescu J. Vaccination, risks, and freedom: The seat belt analogy. Public Health Ethics. 2019; 12 (3).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Gravagna K., Becker A., Valeris-Chacin R. et al. Global assessment of national mandatory vaccination policies and consequences of non-compliance. Vaccine. 2020; 38.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Hough-Telford C., Kimberlin D.W., Aban I., Hitchcock W. P., Almquist J., Kratz R., O’Connor K.G. Vaccine delays, refusals, and patient dismissals: A survey of pediatricians. Pediatrics. 2016; 138.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Høye A. How would increasing seat belt use affect the number of killed or seriously injured light vehicle occupants? Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2016; 88.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Klyuchevskaya N. Obligatory vaccination, suspension from work of unvaccinated employees: An expert assessment of modern methods of combating covid-19. URL: www.garant.ru›news/1475118.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Krasser A. Compulsory vaccination in a fundamental rights perspective: Lessons from the ECtHR. URL: https://www.degruyter.com›doi›icl-2021-0010›h.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Kucinich D. A new movement: Health care as a civil right. September 9, 2009. URL: https://www.opednews.com/articles/A-New-Movement-Health-Car-by-Dennis-Kucinich-090909-152.html.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>Navin M.C., Largent M.A. Improving nonmedical vaccine exemption policies: Three case studies. Public Health Ethics. 2017; 10.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>Pierik R. Mandatory vaccination: An unqualified defense. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 2018; 35 (2).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>Ritov I., Baron J. Reluctance to vaccinate. Omission bias and ambiguity. Journal of Behavioural Decision Making. 1990; 3.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation>Salmon D.A., Moulton L.H., Omer S.B., DeHart M.P., Stokley S., Halsey N.A. Factors associated with refusal of childhood vaccines among parents of school-aged children: A case- control study. Archives of Pediatrics &amp; Adolescent Medicine. 2005l 159 (5).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>Schmitt H.J., Booy R., Weil-Olivier C., Van Damme P., Cohen R., Peltola H. Child vaccination policies in Europe: A report from the summits of independent European vaccination experts. Lancet Infectious Disease. 2003; 3 (2).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation>Smith P.J., Humiston S.G., Marcuse E.K., Zhao Z., Dorell C.G., Howes C., Hibbs B. Parental delay or refusal of vaccine doses. Childhood vaccination coverage at 24 months of age, and the health belief model. Public Health Reports. 2011; 126 (Supplement 2).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation>Traffic Safety Facts: Children. Washington; 2009.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation>Vines T., Faunce T. Civil liberties and the critics of safe vaccination: Australian Vaccination Network Inc v Health Care Complaints Commission. Journal of Law and Medicine. 2012; 20 (1).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation>Walkinshaw E. Mandatory vaccinations: The international landscape. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2011; 183 (16).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation>Wang E., Clymer J., Davis-Hayes C., Buttenheim A. Nonmedical exemptions from school immunization requirements: A systematic review. American Journal of Public Health. 2014; 104.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
