‘SHAMING UNVACCINATED PEOPLE HAS TO STOP’
JULIAN SAVULESCU AND ALBERTO GIUBILINI, ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, SHARE CONCERNS ON PUBLIC-SHAMING OF PEOPLE, WHATEVER THE REASON MAY BE
Among the kind of headlines over the past year, highlighting public shaming of unvaccinated people who die of COVID-19 was one that read: “Unvaccinated mother, 27, dies with coronavirus as her father calls for fines for people who refuse jab.”
There was even a news outlet that compiled a list of “notable anti-vaxxers who have died from COVID-19”.
There’s shaming on social media, too. For instance, a whole Reddit channel is devoted to mocking people who die after refusing the vaccine.
COVID-19 vaccinations save lives and reduce the need for hospitalisation. This is all important public health information. Telling relatable stories and using emotive language about vaccination sends a message: getting vaccinated is good.
But the problem with the examples above is their tone and the way unvaccinated people are singled out. There’s also a murkier reason behind this shaming.
WHY DO WE SHAME PEOPLE?
Julian Savulescu, Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, University of Oxford; and Alberto Giubilini, Senior Research Fellow, University of Oxford, recently wrote an article on the topic on the website The Conversation, which was further quoted by the PTI. “Shaming unvaccinated people has to stop. We’ve turned into an angry mob and it’s getting ugly,” they say in it.
Reminding us that public shaming is not new, Julian and Alberto say it’s entrenched in human history and psychology. From an evolutionary perspective, shame is a way of keeping individuals accountable to the other members of their community for their perceived anti-social behaviours.
Philosophers Guy Aitchison says that moralising about other people’s behaviour can help us feel better about ourselves.
The online world exacerbates this human tendency. It polarises two heavily moralised camps: the self-perceived good, responsible people on one side (the shaming ones), and the ones considered bad, irresponsible people on the other (the shamed ones).
Vaccination has become such a sensitive issue it easily triggers the instinct to shame others.
DO PEOPLE DESERVE TO BE SHAMED?
Shaming people for their health-related choices disregards the complexities about whether people are individually responsible for their own decisions.
Take obesity, another example associated with public shaming. The extent to which individuals are responsible for their obesity or for the lifestyle that causes obesity is complex. We need to consider issues including genes, environment, wealth and choice. Indeed, shaming people for their obesity is now widely considered unacceptable.
Likewise, low levels of vaccine uptake in some communities are often linked to structural inequalities, including health inequality, and a resulting lack of trust. The blame for this situation is typically placed on broader society and institutions, and not on the affected groups or individuals.
If someone cannot be blamed for something, then shaming them is not ethically justifiable.
In discussions around responsibility, it’s now common to focus on “structural injustice” or “inequality” — the injustice of various social factors that shape choice and behaviour.
This applies to not only obesity, drugs and alcohol but also vaccination decisions.
Finally, points out the author duo, we should remember why medical ethics has designated autonomy and consent as foundational ethical values. Even where there is a clear expected benefit, and only very rare side effects, these won’t be shared equally.
Many will have their lives saved. But some people will be the ones who suffer the harms. This a strong reason for respecting people’s decision about what risks they want to take on themselves.
COVID-19 VACCINATIONS SAVE LIVES AND REDUCE THE NEED FOR HOSPITALISATION. THIS IS IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEALTH INFORMATION. TELLING RELATABLE STORIES AND USING EMOTIVE LANGUAGE ABOUT VACCINATION SENDS A MESSAGE: GETTING VACCINATED IS GOOD. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THE TONE AND THE WAY UNVACCINATED PEOPLE ARE SINGLED OUT.
SHAMING PEOPLE FOR THEIR HEALTH-RELATED CHOICES DISREGARDS THE COMPLEXITIES ABOUT WHETHER PEOPLE ARE INDIVIDUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN DECISIONS. TAKE OBESITY, ANOTHER EXAMPLE ASSOCIATED WITH PUBLIC SHAMING. THE EXTENT TO WHICH INDIVIDUALS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OBESITY OR FOR THE LIFESTYLE THAT CAUSES OBESITY IS COMPLEX. WE NEED TO CONSIDER ISSUES INCLUDING GENES, ENVIRONMENT... SHAMING PEOPLE FOR THEIR OBESITY (“FAT SHAMING”) IS NOW WIDELY CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE.
RESPECTING INDEPENDENT DECISIONS
Barring any public health issue, says the author duo, an individual should make the decisions about health risks, whether they are from the disease or vaccines.
Shaming them, however, disregards the complexities of the distribution of risks and benefits, of the way individual values affect individual risk assessment, and of personal circumstances shaping people’s views on vaccines.
SHAMING, A FORM OF VIGILANTISM
Even if shaming was effective, shaming wouldn’t necessarily be ethically justified. Not everything that is effective at achieving a goal is also ethical. Torture is, generally, not a justifiable way to obtain information, even if that information is credible and life-saving.
Shaming is a form of vigilantism, a mob-behaviour, the authors state. We have moved beyond burning witches or atheists, or lynching wrongdoers. We should stop doing these things also in the metaphorical sense.
We have parliaments and formal mechanisms for limiting behaviour, or incentivising it. We should leave it to these to regulate behaviour, not the media or the mob.