Article Text
Abstract
Policies for the allocation of COVID-19 vaccine were implemented in early 2021 as soon as vaccine became available. Those responsible for the planning and execution of COVID-19 vaccination had to make choices about who received vaccination first while numerous authors offered their own recommendations. This paper provides an account of how such decisions should be made by focusing on the specifics of the situation at hand. In that light, I offer an argument for prioritising those who are likely vectors of the disease and a criticism of the victim-focused priority proposals put forward by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, the UK National Health Service, and others. I also offer thoughts on how those authors may have gone astray.
- COVID-19
- public policy
- resource allocation
- distributive justice
- ethics
This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.
https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usageStatistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Presented at The material for this paper was presented on the following panels: ASBH, 'Justice at Stake: Distributing a COVID-19 Vaccine', 18 October 2020; 'What Did Bioethics Contribute to the COVID-19 Pandemic Response? A Retrospective', Wiley Press Symposium, 17 March 2021; and 'Equity and Justice in the COVID-19 Emergency', Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Trento, Italy, 18 May 2021.
Correction notice This paper has been updated since first published to correct author details in footnote xi.
Contributors RR is the sole author of this paper.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Vaccine ethics: an ethical framework for global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines
- WHO’s allocation framework for COVAX: is it fair?
- Global, regional, and national estimates of target population sizes for covid-19 vaccination: descriptive study
- Ethical allocation of future COVID-19 vaccines
- Love thy neighbour? Allocating vaccines in a world of competing obligations
- Who will receive the last ventilator: why COVID-19 policies should not prioritise healthcare workers
- An intersectional human rights approach to prioritising access to COVID-19 vaccines
- Implementation of covid-19 vaccination in the United Kingdom
- Justice and procedure: how does “accountability for reasonableness” result in fair limit-setting decisions?
- Public attitudes about equitable COVID-19 vaccine allocation: a randomised experiment of race-based versus novel place-based frames