COVID-19 Bioethics: Vaccine

By Isha Shrivastava

Our lives have changed to adapt to the pandemic, mainly to preserve our health and happiness. We often reassure ourselves that normalcy will return once a proper vaccine is developed. People will be able to go to work or school, see their friends and family, and go on vacation freely.

However, with around 150 possible vaccine candidates, all in varying states of testing, we have had to take a step back from that dream. Once a vaccine is proven effective, how will it reach everyone who needs it? How will we prioritize who gets the vaccine first when so many have been affected by it, especially since the current pandemic has devastated those with preexisting “disadvantages” the most?

---

It is hasty and inaccurate to believe a vaccine will be an easy solution for the crises the world is facing from COVID-19. As critical as it is for the resurgence of the economy and return to normalcy, it will be a slow and complicated process nonetheless.

Ruth Faden from John Hopkins provided her stance on the ethical questions of vaccine distribution. "There are going to be many complicated issues for us to understand and address," Faden says. "Hopefully this committee, along with other groups, will contribute to solutions for this massive geopolitical challenge: Ensuring that all people, regardless of where in the world they live, will have the benefit of a COVID-19 vaccine." She is currently working with the World Health Organization and a team of experts to make decisions regarding global access to the future vaccine.

Rather than government or research-based labs being in charge of developing a vaccine, private businesses are taking this into their own hands. This raises concerns over whether these private developers can make affordable vaccines that will be available to low-income families and countries (similar to the recent ventilator situation). When the vaccine does become available, there will not be enough to supply everyone who needs it. Therefore, it is obvious that wealthier countries will end up with the vaccine first. Be that as it may, those countries will eventually have to decide whether they can share it with other countries who cannot gain access to it, or keep the vaccine to themselves. This acknowledges the ethics raised in a question from the aforementioned bioethicist, Ruth Faden, “Although there is an expectation that countries with the resources and production capacity will meet their own health needs first, should they ignore the needs of people living in other countries with severe economic constraints?”

Not only do those countries who have access to the vaccine have to decide if they should share it, but they have to decide how they must distribute it amongst their citizens. This brings three groups of people into the mix: essential workers, patients of other illnesses, and people of color. In the past, essential and healthcare workers were considered a top priority for receiving ventilators. They are still considered a top priority for vaccination because they are needed for society to function and to go back to normal. Nevertheless, this complicates things for the authority positions, as they have to decide who is counted as “essential” versus “non-essential.” Medically at-risk patients are also pushed to the top of the list. These are the people who are most likely to suffer fatal conditions if they become infected by the virus. Lastly, people of color are being affected by the conditions of the pandemic at unreasonable rates. Most prominently in the U.S., people of color, especially those with financial issues, are experiencing disproportionately high rates of cases and deaths due to deep-rooted issues in the system. Experts and developers should keep in mind the weightage of putting people of color higher up in line for vaccine priority.

In essence, without the consideration of various ethical questions, the COVID-19 vaccine will not be as effective as predicted when it is finalized. Even after its production, there will not be enough to provide it to everyone who requires it. Thus, countries with higher and better methods of access will have to handle ethical and moral concerns unique to them, by being given the choice to share their resources with other nations. Certain at-risk groups of citizens need to be given the necessary priority for vaccination as well. Governments, in the end, will need to keep in mind several laws of bioethics and utilitarianism to ensure the maximum safety of the maximum amount of people.

Sources

Maschke, Karen J., and Michael K. Gusmano. “Ethics and Evidence in the Search for a Vaccine and

Treatments for Covid-19.” The Hastings Center, 29 Apr. 2020,

www.thehastingscenter.org/ethics-and-evidence-in-the-search-for-a-vaccine-and-treatments-

for-covid-19/.

Meaney, Joseph. “COVID-19 Vaccines.” The National Catholic Bioethics

Center, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, 24 July 2020, www.ncbcenter.org/messages-

from-presidents/covid-19-vaccines.

Pearce, Katie. “Distributing a COVID-19 Vaccine Raises Complex Ethical Issues.” The Hub, 1 July

2020, hub.jhu.edu/2020/07/01/covid-vaccine-ethics-faden/.

Weijer, Charles. “Ethics Must Not Be Ignored When Testing COVID-19 Vaccines.” The

Conversation, 6 Sept. 2020, theconversation.com/ethics-must-not-be-ignored-when-testing-

covid-19-vaccines-141736.

World Health Organization. Ethics-Covid-19-Resource-Allocation.pdf. 2020,

www.who.int/ethics/publications/ethics-covid-19-resource-allocation.pdf?ua=1.