Critical statement from expert: 'Vaccination could be mandatory'

In the workshop titled "Preparing for the Next Pandemic: Questioning Vaccine Mandates Through the Lens of Covid-19 and Childhood Vaccines," where the possibility of making vaccines mandatory when public health protection is at stake was evaluated, Health Law Expert Assoc. Prof. Dr. Meliha Sermin Paksoy clarified why mandatory vaccination is still being questioned and debated from a legal perspective.

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Paksoy noted that vaccines, albeit rarely, show foreseen but unavoidable side effects, stating, "The possibility that some individuals may be harmed when vaccinated is what causes this debate. In an ideal legal system, information regarding this must be provided, and precautions must be taken. A vaccine is, in fact, a medical intervention. As explained in the constitution and many international texts, a medical intervention can only be performed with the person's personal informed consent."

What are the exceptions to the right to refuse medical intervention? When and how can vaccination be made mandatory?

Dr. Paksoy pointed out that the key criteria for making vaccination mandatory are contagiousness and the threat to public health. According to Dr. Paksoy, in addition to these, a mandate could be introduced through legal regulation by evaluating whether the infectious disease, even if not fatal, paralyzes the healthcare system, causes the country's working population to be unable to work for a long time, and the financial burden it would create.

"The state must compensate for damages arising from vaccination"

She stated that even if states do not explicitly mandate vaccination through legislation, they can recommend it in a way that ensures herd immunity by considering the public interest, as was done during the pandemic.

"Although mandatory vaccination was not mentioned during the pandemic, restrictions were placed on access to many services. When there are heavy restrictions on essential services—for example, as in the pandemic period, when those who did not show their vaccination card were not allowed to enter schools or their institutions, or could not board a plane—we can speak of an indirect vaccine mandate," she said.

Paksoy emphasized that in cases of explicit or indirect vaccine mandates, the damage from severe side effects that occur in one in 100,000 or 600,000 cases must also be compensated through the state.

"If there is no contagiousness or pandemic risk, a mandate cannot be foreseen."

Addressing vaccines intended for non-communicable diseases, Paksoy said, "For example, will a mandate be possible for diseases that are not transmitted from person to person, such as Tetanus, or for preventive cancer vaccines that Biontech has announced it is working on? In my opinion, a general vaccine mandate cannot be foreseen for a non-communicable disease. Because a person has the right to refuse treatment. A vaccine is also a form of preventive medical intervention. If a person wishes, they do not get vaccinated; if they wish, they do not undergo bypass surgery, even if the end result is death," she expressed her view.

What is the situation with childhood vaccines?

Paksoy also clarified the situation regarding childhood vaccines:

"With the decision known in the public as the Halime Sare Aysal ruling in 2015, the Constitutional Court determined that childhood vaccines are not mandatory. Since no new legal regulation has been made since then, there is a recommendation for childhood vaccines, but no mandate.

If we can reach the level of herd immunity through recommendations, making the relevant vaccine mandatory would be a disproportionate intervention. According to the data announced by the Ministry of Health, the level of herd immunity is achieved in childhood vaccinations without a mandate. As long as this situation does not change, I am of the opinion that a mandate cannot be introduced for childhood vaccines."

News Source: 12punto