Moral obligation to have the vaccine. Is one of us being selfish?

[FLOrenze]

We are in our mid 70s and are both very fit. We have strictly observed the rules from the beginning. The on-line calculator says we should be due for the vaccine in February.

DH says he won’t have it yet so that someone further down the line can be vaccinated. I think we have a moral obligation to vaccinate.

His view is that we we only go to the supermarket, we wear masks and wash our hands. I think that even though we have minimal chance of catching the virus he should protect me before others.

But regarding him self-isolating and taking precautions, etc, that's really not the point.

It is insofar as he's in a stronger position than others to avoid contracting the virus and passing it on.

All the people who need it more than him are already ahead of him in the queue.

I think we all have a moral duty to do what we can, but I don’t believe it should be compulsory.

Does he think he’s just going to be able to dip back in when he feels ready? I blinking love the NHS, but they aren’t hot on the admin at the best of times.

Morals are complicated. I don't think this is a situation where you can claim moral superiority - whether you're choosing to take the vaccine or not. Yy it could be argued there is a moral imperative to participate in mass vaccination but it could also be argued that it is morally questionable to attempt to pressure someone into taking a vaccine at a time when they don't wish to take it. I know social media loves to put people into two sides and claim one of them is right and the other wrong but it's not a helpful or ethically sound approach.

@BlackberrySky

If he doesn't take the vaccine, then he can't expect those at lower risk to continue to disrupt their lives and opportunities in order to protect him.

I can see things going this way - there will be more and more cases reported in the media of vulnerable people not getting the vaccine.

This will then piss off a large proportion of the population who have had their lives completely turned upside down in the name of protecting said vulnerable people.

So a lot of people are going to say “fuck it, if they’re not bothering, then we’re not going to anymore either”.

The only people I think have moral obligation are healthcare professionals or care workers who will be in close contact with vulnerable people. For anyone else, it's up to them especially at the moment when there is a shortage of vaccines. Arguably, if you are healthy and can isolate not getting vaccinated at the moment is less selfish than getting vaccinated.

I agree that it’s a moral duty.

It’s nothing to do with venerating older people, but everything to do with their increased likelihood of falling seriously ill and occupying a hospital bed for weeks on end, not to mention spreading it further.

Haven't read every response so don't know if it's been suggested yet... but do you think he's being 'selfless' (letting someone else have it), or is he worried about potential side effects/long term complications so is 'letting' someone else be a 'guinea pig'?

I know a couple of people who want to see how it affects others so avoiding having it yet, but are framing it as selflessly letting someone else have theirs so they look virtuous

@Belladonna12

The only people I think have moral obligation are healthcare professionals or care workers who will be in close contact with vulnerable people. For anyone else, it's up to them especially at the moment when there is a shortage of vaccines. Arguably, if you are healthy and can isolate not getting vaccinated at the moment is less selfish than getting vaccinated.

But then we are literally stuck in this exact same situation for decades, with people dying, children unable to get basic schooling, people dying unnecessarily of cancer/other often treatable illnesses, people losing their livelihoods, healthcare workers having to see people die in front of their eyes on a regular basis...

I really don’t understand how anyone can think that is morally ok. If people who were careful were not getting infected, ICUs would be half empty right now. Even if you cut yourself off and quarantine indefinitely, if you need medical help for anything else you can catch it.

I read about someone’s 80-something father refusing the vaccine “because it isn’t safe” and then having the bare-faced cheek to think his family were going to continue to shield alongside him. People like that should be shipped to a remote (cold and rainy) island. We must still have one somehwere?!

Arguably, if you are healthy and can isolate not getting vaccinated at the moment is less selfish than getting vaccinated.

With the logistics the way they are at the moment, that’s just not true.

It’s a massive task getting all this organised, tracking who’s had it, when they need to come back for the 2nd jab etc etc. It works best if it’s rolled out as planned rather than chopping and changing lists every 5 minutes, especially where there are temperature/storage/expiry concerns.

People might like to have a romantic view that they’re nobly giving up their space so that a young person with asthma or whatever can have it instead; but that’s actually pretty unlikely to happen due to the complicated logistics and organisation - what’s far more likely is that if they can’t get someone in last minute they’ll either vaccinate the nearest person they can find or it will go to waste.

Plus then you have to deal with what PP’s have said about then causing more admin faff with them having to try and rebook you in, causing more knock on affects further down the line.

Given the shambolic rollout of this, whats more likely to happen is he will be given a slot and if he doesn't take it, it will be wasted and not given to someone else instead, simply because there isn't the time / logistically planning / staffing to allow cancellation / deferment paperwork to get through in time.

There is no chivalry in this. Time doesn't allow for it. Just get it done.

And getting it at a later date only creates more problems, rather than solving them. You end up being a nuisance to the system rather than a help.

And there is always the chance that you will get it, and get hospitalised which is what is trying to be prevented. He's not 30 anymore and his age alone put him at elevated risk of hospitalisation (and thats as cruical at this stage as simply dying).

Tell your husband he needs a kick up the arse and a reality check.

Most people are not very vulnerable to the virus. Some, however, really are and the lockdowns and economic price we are paying is to protect the vulnerable people. I think that vulnerable people also have a duty to protect themselves, especially if they would want hospital care if they needed it.

I think the fact that you are fit and active is more reason to take it. If you were at deaths door I could sort of understand the line of thinking of "if not covid, then something else soon" although would still disagree (and am sure your family would too). But if you are active 70 year olds you should have many many more years of active life ahead god willing. Under those circumstances it would be crazy to turn down hospital treatment if you got sick - so if you were seriously ill with covid of course you/your DH should be in hospital "blocking beds". Far better to avoid that scenario by taking the vacine.
You could use that arguement with your DH if you think it would help?

@IrmaFayLear I think the remote cold and rainy Island is Great Britain actually... :(

I've had the same thought - to refuse and have it later - because I so rarely leave the house that my risk of catching it or passing it on is minimal. But imagine how disruptive it would be if all of us decided where we should be in the schedule? I'll take it when I'm offered.

@Dyrne

Arguably, if you are healthy and can isolate not getting vaccinated at the moment is less selfish than getting vaccinated.

With the logistics the way they are at the moment, that’s just not true.

It’s a massive task getting all this organised, tracking who’s had it, when they need to come back for the 2nd jab etc etc. It works best if it’s rolled out as planned rather than chopping and changing lists every 5 minutes, especially where there are temperature/storage/expiry concerns.

People might like to have a romantic view that they’re nobly giving up their space so that a young person with asthma or whatever can have it instead; but that’s actually pretty unlikely to happen due to the complicated logistics and organisation - what’s far more likely is that if they can’t get someone in last minute they’ll either vaccinate the nearest person they can find or it will go to waste.

Plus then you have to deal with what PP’s have said about then causing more admin faff with them having to try and rebook you in, causing more knock on affects further down the line.

The AstraZeneca one is stored in the fridge so there aren't difficult temperature/storage concerns . Once reconstituted it doesn't expire for six hours . If someone doesn't turn up, it will just be given to the next person on the waiting list. I don't see why it should lead to waste if someone doesn't want the vaccine.

I think it's your choice and you shouldn't feel pressured in to it or shamed for not wanting it.

I do think though that it is silly to believe that turning it down will result in some younger person who needs it getting it quicker.

Risks will have been assessed, groups categorised, if you're in a group that's prioritised, you'll be offered it sooner.

They're not saying ok, now all gemini vegetarians, next! There is a rationale.

I am 50 and I don't thiiiiiiink I'll have it but that is mostly because by the time they get to me, it will have died down.

His view is that we we only go to the supermarket, we wear masks and wash our hands. I think that even though we have minimal chance of catching the virus he should protect me before others.

This is not true. My partner's dad died from Covid and he was doing the exact same thing and being very careful. You cannot control others. This is also quite disrespectful as it suggests that people who have caught covid were doing something wrong. Maybe he's coming from the right place and trying to be selfless but it is not selfless.

Also, one of the reasons for vaccinating the elderly first is that you are more liekly to end up in the ICU with it...so he would be taking up a hospital bed that could be used for someone else if he caught it which is far more damaging to others than letting someone else have his vaccine.

He should just havd the vaccine when its his turn.

The AstraZeneca one is stored in the fridge so there aren't difficult temperature/storage concerns . Once reconstituted it doesn't expire for six hours . If someone doesn't turn up, it will just be given to the next person on the waiting list. I don't see why it should lead to waste if someone doesn't want the vaccine.

Perhaps "the next person on the waiting list" can't get to the vaccination centre in the time allowed, especially since they're in town "hubs" rather than their usual local GP surgery. Perhaps the admin person doesn't have the time to phone several people "next on the waiting list" to try to find someone able to get there at short notice.

sorry last sentence was phrased poorly. I mean taking up a hospital bed is worse than taking up a vaccine dose. Take the vaccine, for the good of everyone!!

@FLOrenze

We are in our mid 70s and are both very fit. We have strictly observed the rules from the beginning. The on-line calculator says we should be due for the vaccine in February.

DH says he won’t have it yet so that someone further down the line can be vaccinated. I think we have a moral obligation to vaccinate.

His view is that we we only go to the supermarket, we wear masks and wash our hands. I think that even though we have minimal chance of catching the virus he should protect me before others.

The vaccine doesn’t prevent you from catching c19 and doesn’t stop transmission. It’s merely to lessen the effects if you catch it. It has a 95% effectiveness after 2 doses, but if you don’t have health issues then there’s only a 0.66% death rate.

If he’s healthy and thinks someone more vulnerable would benefit from it, then he’s not selfish at all.

www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1327

@Belladonna12

The only people I think have moral obligation are healthcare professionals or care workers who will be in close contact with vulnerable people. For anyone else, it's up to them especially at the moment when there is a shortage of vaccines. Arguably, if you are healthy and can isolate not getting vaccinated at the moment is less selfish than getting vaccinated.

Ok, but then if you do catch it, you end up in the ICU taking up a hospital bed (maybe from cancer patients as well as other covid patients) in an already overwhelmed NHS because you thought you knew better. Everyone offered the vaccine has a moral obligation to take it to increase herd immunity and reduce pressure on hospitals.

You have a civic obligation to take the vaccination.

Your husband has thought of a moral reason that might trump his civic obligation.

@Danu2021

I think it's your choice and you shouldn't feel pressured in to it or shamed for not wanting it.

I do think though that it is silly to believe that turning it down will result in some younger person who needs it getting it quicker.

Risks will have been assessed, groups categorised, if you're in a group that's prioritised, you'll be offered it sooner.

They're not saying ok, now all gemini vegetarians, next! There is a rationale.

I am 50 and I don't thiiiiiiink I'll have it but that is mostly because by the time they get to me, it will have died down.

There is a rationale but it is quite crude with a lot of uncertainty. They weren't able to take into account people's individual circumstances such as how easy it is to avoid contact with people who were infected. Whilst someone may be quite high risk they may not have to work and be able to avoid infection and overall have a lower risk of death than someone who is younger and vulnerable and has to work for example.