File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1007/s11019-023-10186-4
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85181513852
- PMID: 38180693
- WOS: WOS:001136743900001
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: The duty of care and the right to be cared for: is there a duty to treat the unvaccinated?
| Title | The duty of care and the right to be cared for: is there a duty to treat the unvaccinated? |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Keywords | Duty of care Right to be cared for Supererogatory |
| Issue Date | 5-Jan-2024 |
| Publisher | Springer |
| Citation | Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 2024 How to Cite? |
| Abstract | Vaccine hesitancy or refusal has been one of the major obstacles to herd immunity against Covid-19 in high-income countries and one of the causes for the emergence of variants. The refusal of people who are eligible for vaccination to receive vaccination creates an ethical dilemma between the duty of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to care for patients and their right to be taken care of. This paper argues for an extended social contract between patients and society wherein vaccination against Covid-19 is conceived as essential for the protection of the right of healthcare providers to be taken care of. Thus, a duty of care is only valid when those who can receive vaccination actually receive it. Whenever that is not the case, the continuing functioning of HCPs can only be perceived as supererogatory and not obligatory. |
| Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/357166 |
| ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 2.3 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.659 |
| ISI Accession Number ID |
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Lederman, Zohar | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Corcos Shalom | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-06-23T08:53:45Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-06-23T08:53:45Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2024-01-05 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 2024 | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1386-7423 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/357166 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | <p>Vaccine hesitancy or refusal has been one of the major obstacles to herd immunity against Covid-19 in high-income countries and one of the causes for the emergence of variants. The refusal of people who are eligible for vaccination to receive vaccination creates an ethical dilemma between the duty of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to care for patients and their right to be taken care of. This paper argues for an extended social contract between patients and society wherein vaccination against Covid-19 is conceived as essential for the protection of the right of healthcare providers to be taken care of. Thus, a duty of care is only valid when those who can receive vaccination actually receive it. Whenever that is not the case, the continuing functioning of HCPs can only be perceived as supererogatory and not obligatory.<br></p> | - |
| dc.language | eng | - |
| dc.publisher | Springer | - |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy | - |
| dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
| dc.subject | Duty of care | - |
| dc.subject | Right to be cared for | - |
| dc.subject | Supererogatory | - |
| dc.title | The duty of care and the right to be cared for: is there a duty to treat the unvaccinated? | - |
| dc.type | Article | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s11019-023-10186-4 | - |
| dc.identifier.pmid | 38180693 | - |
| dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85181513852 | - |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 1572-8633 | - |
| dc.identifier.isi | WOS:001136743900001 | - |
| dc.identifier.issnl | 1386-7423 | - |