How Bodily Autonomy Can Fail Against Vaccination Mandates: The Few vs. the Many.

Humans have been a communal species since inception and continue to be so to this day. Because of this, if even a small scale of a measured population becomes severely ill, the entire remaining population and surrounding area is thrown into absolute chaos. In fact, we have seen these circumstances throughout history and in the recent COVID-19 pandemic yet, some of us have forgotten that the only way this chaos can be curbed, is by enacting a mandatory vaccination policy. Since COVID-19 however, vaccination mandates have become an uneasy topic of conversation in the United States for essentially one main reason, some U.S citizens do not like to be told what to do with their body and what to place inside it, further believing their bodily autonomy to be absolute. Data shows that this ideology recently became more widespread from an increase of mistrust of government and pharmaceutical companies, and from political beliefs and affiliations. Nevertheless, what the data also shows is that these same individuals were asserting their right to bodily autonomy against a vaccination mandate in an unduly aggressive manner, and on a very erroneous understanding of the governing jurisprudence, policies and modern scientific data surrounding said vaccination mandates and large scale disease outbreaks. This article therefore aims to provide a clear and extensive understanding of the proposition that, while bodily autonomy is favored in other aspects of life, this right can fail with respect to deadly disease outbreaks and mandatory vaccinations as there is presently no other practical or feasible alternative. Specifically, this article introduces and/or reminds the U.S. public of well-established governing case law, relevant historical and scientific information and the pertinent legislative authority surrounding vaccines, bodily autonomy, and vaccination mandates.

"If they get out of drug rehab centers, they're on their own": Opportunities and challenges for people released from compulsory drug rehabilitation centers to communities in Vietnam.

INTRODUCTION: Compulsory drug rehabilitation is a major governmental response to illicit drug use in Vietnam and other countries in Asia. Long-term compulsory rehabilitation is associated with negative health, social and economic outcomes. The transition to community-based services for people released from compulsory drug rehabilitation has been problematic not only in Vietnam. This study utilized the WHO Health System Building Blocks Framework to examine the opportunities and challenges for people with substance use disorders (SUD) who are released from compulsory drug rehabilitation back into the community. METHODS: Between October 2021 and August 2022, we interviewed people with SUD who had recently returned from or were preparing to leave compulsory drug rehabilitation (n = 25), their family members (n = 20) and professionals working in the field of drug rehabilitation (n = 28) across three cities in Vietnam. Additionally, we conducted a review of policy documents to complement the interview data. RESULTS: The study identified opportunities and challenges within Vietnam's drug rehabilitation system concerning leadership and governance, financing, workforce, information systems and service delivery for people with SUD. Key opportunities include a legal framework that emphasizes community-based support for people with SUD, a government-funded national network of lay social workers, and ongoing efforts to connect people to community-based services. We found significant challenges caused by the lack of clear instructions for implementing supportive policies, inadequate funding for community-based services, persisting stigma from providers towards people with SUD and unavailability of community-based drug treatment other than methadone. CONCLUSION: Vietnam continues with compulsory drug rehabilitation yet endorses recovery-oriented policies to address substance use issues. Substantial challenges hinder the effective implementation of these policies. Our study recommends reinforcing existing policies and enhancing recovery-oriented community-based services by improving the quality of data collection, building capacity of lay social workers who facilitate linkages to services and expanding community-based drug treatment options.

Mandated Parent Education: Applications, Impacts, and Future Directions.

Mandated participation in parent education programs is a common practice across the United States for families who are undergoing divorce or who are involved in the child welfare or juvenile justice systems. Mandates to participate in parenting programs create substantial challenges for families, service providers, and service systems. Furthermore, the type and quality of the parenting services accessed vary widely, and their impacts need to be better understood. To address this need, an overview of the current state of the empirical literature on the impacts and outcomes of mandated parenting interventions for divorce and in child welfare and juvenile justice settings is provided, and suggestions to the field are offered to refine research related to mandated parenting programs. Given the challenges that mandated parenting programs pose, an alternative approach that views parenting through a public health lens is highlighted to build on the growing body of research on the impacts of population-wide applications of parenting support programs, and as a possible way to decrease the number of parents who are required to attend parenting programs. Opportunities to advance universal parenting support within a range of community settings, including primary care, early childhood education, and community mental health systems are offered. Gaps in knowledge regarding mechanisms of action of universal supports and impacts on the number of parents mandated to treatment are highlighted, and future directions for research in this area are suggested.

The Compatibility of Mandatory Vaccination with the European Convention on Human Rights: Implications for a National Vaccination Policy.

This contribution examines the compatibility of mandatory vaccination with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) through an analysis of the relevant ECHR rights and related case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). By focusing on Article 8 (Right to Private Life), Article 2 (Right to Life) and Article 9 (Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion) ECHR, we formulate conditions under which mandatory vaccination legislation is justified. With that, this analysis aims to provide national legislators with guidance on responsible legislative policy. Additionally, this article discusses the legal framework underlying the Dutch vaccination policy, including developments therein since COVID-19. Furthermore, the role of the European Union in the context of vaccination is briefly discussed. The importance of an extensive societal and parliamentary debate before implementing a mandatory vaccination policy is stressed, as is the need for proportionality in enforcement.

The impact of COVID-19 vaccination campaign on pediatric vaccine uptake based on parents' attitudes towards mandatory and recommended vaccination in Southern Italy.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigates the association between parental attitudes towards mandatory and recommended vaccines in the National Immunization Plan (NIP) of Italy and their acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years. METHODS: Using data from approximately 42,000 children in Southern Italy, parental attitudes towards previous vaccinations were examined. Mandatory and recommended vaccinations were considered for the analysis, with the first shot of each schedule being considered relevant, regardless of when it was administered or whether the recommended number of doses was administered. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to analyze associations between the covariates of age, sex, adherence to mandatory vaccinations, number of recommended vaccinations, and COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: The COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate was 50.7% in our sample. We revealed a strong association between parental attitudes towards previous vaccinations and the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine. Mandatory vaccinations under the NIP showed the highest acceptance rates, and among non-mandatory vaccines, the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine had the highest acceptance rate, potentially due to its co-administration with the hexavalent vaccine. The study identified a trend of lower COVID-19 vaccine coverage in younger children. CONCLUSIONS: The study underscores the importance of co-administration approaches and well-planned vaccination schedules in enhancing vaccine coverage. It suggests that integrating newer vaccines, like the COVID-19 vaccine, into established vaccination schedules could potentially increase acceptance and coverage. The findings highlight the urgency of addressing vaccine hesitancy, particularly in the pediatric population, to ensure high vaccination coverage and effective disease control. Further research is needed to explore the potential strategies to increase vaccine acceptance.

Collective good and individual choice: Perceptions on COVID-19 vaccine mandate among COVID-19 vaccinated individuals.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccine mandates are controversial, and people vary widely in their preferences to support or reject vaccine mandates. For some, vaccine mandates represent a commitment to reduce harm and support public health. For others, vaccine mandates are viewed as a threat to individual freedom and a violation of personal choice. This manuscript investigated support for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate among COVID-19-vaccinated individuals and identified differences by demographic characteristics and COVID-19 experience. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys were given to COVID-19-vaccinated individuals at a vaccination clinic in South Texas in the U.S. with the goal of identifying attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccination and willingness to support a COVID-19 vaccination mandate. Associations of interest were analyzed using descriptive statistics. KEY RESULTS: Approximately half of the sample was of Hispanic or Latino origin (48 %); most respondents identified as White (59 %), followed by 12 % who identified as Asian. Overall, 59 % of participants supported the possibility for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Preliminary data showed significant racial differences in willingness to support a possible COVID-19 vaccine mandate (χ2 (1, n = 893) = 26.7, p < .001, phi = .17); 80 % of Asian people reported support for COVID-19 vaccination mandate compared to 50 % to 57 % for other racial groups. Significant differences also emerged by ethnicity (χ2 (4, n = 1033) = 7.12, p = .008, phi = .08) whereby a higher percentage of Latino participants (66 %) reported willingness to support a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Similarly, significant differences were found by age (χ2 (4, n = 1045) = 20.92, p < .001, phi = .21), yet no significant differences were found by sex or previous COVID-19 diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Support for a COVID-19 vaccination mandate is controversial even among vaccinated people. Identifying and understanding cultural and contextual factors that underlie differences in attitudes and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination mandates is essential to advance dialogue and inform educational health campaigns to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates.

Education increases patience: Evidence from a change in a compulsory schooling law.

I investigate the causal effect of education on time preferences. To deal with the endogeneity of education, I exploit exogenous variation in education imposed by a Turkish school reform that raised compulsory education from five to eight years. I find that education causes individuals to make more patient inter-temporal choices but does not induce them to report being more patient. I also provide evidence that the effect of education on patient inter-temporal choices does not operate through changes in financial well-being.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine mandates in raising vaccination rates among the elderly and general population in Europe: Controlled interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, three European countries (Austria, Greece, Italy) announced and/or implemented mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for high-risk groups in the general population. Besides the ethical justification for this policy, it is important to assess and quantify the effectiveness of the mandate in raising vaccination rates. METHODS: Controlled interrupted time series analysis of first-dose vaccination rates in the targeted age groups (Greece: ≥60 years; Italy: ≥50 years) relative to a control group (Greece: 50-59 years; Italy: 25-49 years) between week 35/2021 and week 50/2022. For Austria an uncontrolled analysis was performed, as the vaccine mandate targeted all adults ≥18 years. RESULTS: Announcement of mandatory vaccination substantially increased vaccination rates in the targeted age groups compared to control in both Greece (RR = 4.36, 95 % CI: 3.57-5.32) and Italy (RR = 2.90, 95 % CI: 2.37-3.56), an effect which persisted throughout the study period. There were 176,428 (95 % CI: 164,097-187,226) mandate-attributable first-dose vaccinations in Greece and 316,192 (95 % CI: 282,467-346,678) in Italy, most of which occurred before the mandate came into effect. In Austria no discernible increase in vaccination rates was observed after the announcement of mandatory vaccination. At the end of the study period, 9.5 % of ≥60 year-olds in Greece, 4.9 % of ≥50 year-olds in Italy and 13.8 % of ≥18 year-olds in Austria remained unvaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: In Greece and Italy - though not in Austria - simple announcement of a vaccine mandate rapidly increased COVID-19 vaccination rates in the targeted age groups, without fully closing the vaccination gap. Mandatory vaccination appears to effectively target complacency but not vaccine hesitancy, and its public health benefits need to be weighted against possible detrimental effects on confidence and trust.

Learning From Consumers of Mandated Sex-Offending Programs: "It's Not Treatment, I Wish It Was."

The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore clients' perceptions of sex-offending treatment. The sample included 291 people required to register as sex offenders in the U.S. who answered an open-ended question in an online survey asking them to describe their positive and negative experiences in mandated treatment. Using qualitative analysis, three overarching themes (with several subthemes) were identified: (1) positive and (2) negative treatment experiences and (3) the affiliation between the criminal justice system and clinical services. Experiences in sex offending treatment were viewed as positive when clients had opportunities to learn about themselves, experience group cohesion, build a positive alliance with a caring therapist, learn tools and skills for emotional health, explore the roots of offense behavior, and create healthy life plans to reduce risk for re-offending. Negative themes emerged when treatments were viewed as coercive, confrontational, or demeaning; when therapists seemed inexperienced or unqualified; and when seemingly outdated or unscientific methods were emphasized without explanation or dialogue. The entanglement between court-mandated treatment providers and the criminal justice system led to concerns about confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and role ambiguity. Drawing upon literature related to therapeutic alliance, trauma-informed care, and Risk-Need-Responsivity models, we offer suggestions for integrating client feedback to improve treatment responsivity and prevent re-offending.

Two for one: Effectiveness of a mandatory personal and classroom stress management program for preservice teachers.

The present study employed a quasi-experimental design to evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of a 6-hr mandatory stress management and well-being program for preservice teachers. A program group of 157 preservice teachers (Mage = 22.46 years; 88% women) completed the program as well as baseline, postprogram, and follow-up measures. A comparison group of 63 preservice teachers (Mage = 23.50 years; 85% women) completed measures at similar time points but did not receive the program. All participants completed measures of stress, coping self-efficacy, anxiety, mindfulness, and well-being. The program group completed additional measures of well-being, affect, and program satisfaction. Findings revealed significant improvements in key indices of mental health and well-being for those in the program group relative to the comparison group and high ratings of program satisfaction. Discussion focuses on implications of present findings for mandatory inclusion of wellness curriculum in teacher preparation programs with instruction on enhancing their own and their students' well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Vaccination Mandates-An Old Public Health Tool Faces New Challenges.

This Viewpoint discusses how federal vaccine requirements have helped thwart vaccine-preventable diseases as well as how growing public resistance to vaccines and judicial and legislative limits to vaccination mandates may change that.

Mandatory Influenza Immunisation for Healthcare Workers.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of contracting and spreading influenza, especially in annual outbreaks. To achieve a high level of health, this matter can be potentially solved with the implementation of mandatory flu vaccination policies. Despite ample evidence of vaccine effectiveness in reducing sickness, hospital visits, and even deaths, there is resistance to mandatory immunization among HCWs. The purpose of this communication is to present the rationale as to why the influenza vaccine should be mandatory among HCWs and to extract its practical and scholarly significance. The article has been organised to highlight the advantages of immunisation for HCWs, recognise the consequences of non-immunization, and resolve the myths associated with the flu vaccine. Finally, the stance and recommendations of several health agencies around the world on mandating the influenza vaccine for HCWs have been incorporated, with relevant literature evidence consolidated to support the narratives. Key Words: Influenza, Vaccination, Health policy, Healthcare workers' vaccine, Mandatory vaccine.

Mandatory and seasonal vaccination against COVID-19: Attitudes of the vaccinated people in Serbia.

The aim of our study was to examine the position of vaccinated people regarding the proposal for mandatory and seasonal vaccination against COVID-19 in Serbia. A cross-sectional study was conducted in a sample of people who came to receive a third dose of COVID-19 at the Institute of Public Health of Serbia in September and October 2021. Data were collected by means of a sociodemographic questionnaire. The study sample comprised 366 vaccinated adults. Factors associated with the belief that vaccination against COVID-19 should become mandatory were being married, being informed about COVID-19 from TV programmes and medical journals, trust in health professionals, and having friends affected by COVID-19. In addition to these predictors, factors associated with the belief that COVID-19 vaccination should become seasonal were being older, consistently wearing facemasks, and not being employed. The results of this study highlight that trust in information delivery, evidence-based data, and healthcare providers may be a major driver of mandatory and seasonal vaccine uptake. A careful assessment of the epidemiological situation, the capacity of the health system, and the risk-benefit ratio is needed in order to introduce seasonal and/or mandatory vaccination against COVID-19.

Cancer Screening after the Adoption of Paid-Sick-Leave Mandates.

BACKGROUND: By the end of 2022, nearly 20 million workers in the United States have gained paid-sick-leave coverage from mandates that require employers to provide benefits to qualified workers, including paid time off for the use of preventive services. Although the lack of paid-sick-leave coverage may hinder access to preventive care, current evidence is insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions about its relationship to cancer screening. METHODS: We examined the association between paid-sick-leave mandates and screening for breast and colorectal cancers by comparing changes in 12- and 24-month rates of colorectal-cancer screening and mammography between workers residing in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) that have been affected by paid-sick-leave mandates (exposed MSAs) and workers residing in unexposed MSAs. The comparisons were conducted with the use of administrative medical-claims data for approximately 2 million private-sector employees from 2012 through 2019. RESULTS: Paid-sick-leave mandates were present in 61 MSAs in our sample. Screening rates were similar in the exposed and unexposed MSAs before mandate adoption. In the adjusted analysis, cancer-screening rates were higher among workers residing in exposed MSAs than among those in unexposed MSAs by 1.31 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 2.34) for 12-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.56 percentage points (95% CI, 0.33 to 2.79) for 24-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.22 percentage points (95% CI, -0.20 to 2.64) for 12-month mammography, and 2.07 percentage points (95% CI, 0.15 to 3.99) for 24-month mammography. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of private-sector workers in the United States, cancer-screening rates were higher among those residing in MSAs exposed to paid-sick-leave mandates than among those residing in unexposed MSAs. Our results suggest that a lack of paid-sick-leave coverage presents a barrier to cancer screening. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute.).

Increases In COVID-19 Vaccination Among NYC Municipal Employees After Implementation Of Vaccination Requirements.

In July 2021 New York City (NYC) instituted a requirement for all municipal employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or undergo weekly testing. The city eliminated the testing option November 1 of that year. We used general linear regression to compare changes in weekly primary vaccination series completion among NYC municipal employees ages 18-64 living in the city and a comparison group of all other NYC residents in this age group during May-December 2021. The rate of change in vaccination prevalence among NYC municipal employees was greater than that of the comparison group only after the testing option was eliminated (employee slope = 12.0; comparison slope = 5.3). Among racial and ethnic groups, the rate of change in vaccination prevalence among municipal employees was higher than the comparison group for Black and White people. The requirements were associated with narrowing the gap in vaccination prevalence between municipal employees and the comparison group overall and between Black municipal employees and employees from other racial and ethnic groups. Workplace requirements are a promising strategy for increasing vaccination among adults and reducing racial and ethnic disparities in vaccination uptake.

The impact of COVID-19 certification mandates on the number of cases of and hospitalizations with COVID-19 in the UK: A difference-in-differences analysis.

Background: Mandatory COVID-19 certification, showing proof of vaccination, negative test, or recent infection to access to public venues, was introduced at different times in the four countries of the UK. We aim to study its effects on the incidence of cases and hospital admissions. Methods: We performed Negative binomial segmented regression and ARIMA analyses for four countries (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales), and fitted Difference-in-Differences models to compare the latter three to England, as a negative control group, since it was the last country where COVID-19 certification was introduced. The main outcome was the weekly averaged incidence of COVID-19 cases and hospital admissions. Results: COVID-19 certification led to a decrease in the incidence of cases and hospital admissions in Northern Ireland, as well as in Wales during the second half of November. The same was seen for hospital admissions in Wales and Scotland during October. In Wales the incidence rate of cases in October already had a decreasing tendency, as well as in England, hence a particular impact of COVID-19 certification was less obvious. Method assumptions for the Difference-in-Differences analysis did not hold for Scotland. Additional NBSR and ARIMA models suggest similar results, while also accounting for correlation in the latter. The assessment of the effect in England itself leads one to believe that this intervention might not be strong enough for the Omicron variant, which was prevalent at the time of introduction of COVID-19 certification in the country. Conclusions: Mandatory COVID-19 certification reduced COVID-19 transmission and hospitalizations when Delta predominated in the UK, but lost efficacy when Omicron became the most common variant.

Do COVID-19 vaccine mandates still make sense?

Ineffective or outdated requirements could undermine trust, some vaccine researchers say.