Vaccine passports

[PicsInRed]

Michael Gove is presently chairing a review into initiating vaccine passports. If these are brought in, those of us who are younger and low risk and there presently ineligible for vaccination will continue to be highly restricted, whilst those we locked down to shield will now be free to socialise freely and travel abroad.

The young, who've taken the economic and social brunt of job loss and/or isolation and/or working the entire pandemic with no break ... will still be without restaurants, theatres, pubs, dating, mates, holidays etc.

Children aren't even licenced for vaccination. Will they be exempt from passporting, or will they be banned from venues and aircraft?

What are your thoughts on passporting before all have access to vaccination? Mine aren't printable.

you seem to have something against sheilders

Nonsense, I just want to leave home for something other than work and essential shopping. I'm not anti sheilders, but after a year stuck home, I'm certainly going to have my own back if they won't.

There is zero reason for me to shelter in place - except for the protection of others. If those others now have the option to be vaccinated, and safe, and soon to be officially resuming their lives with a vaccine passport...and I'm still home with no vaccine in sight so I can't even choose to get free?

And people were told they were co me spinach theorists about this . What about the passports for the other vaccinations people don’t have . Measles for instance?

Glad to see Liberty see this as a major infringement of our rights

www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/libertys-view-on-immunity-passports/

@PiggyPlumPie

Doesn't it also depend on what other countries want?

If, for example, Australia say that you can only enter if you've been vaccinated what then?

If that happens so be it. I either get a vaccine passport app or I don't travel. DH will have to get a smartphone I suppose, although he won't be happy about it.

But I fail to see why I should prove I've been vaccinated every time I enter a supermarket or cafe. It's ludicrous.

I'd be livid if the very people we shut down to protect were then allowed to travel about whilst the rest of us, and younger people, were resigned to staying at home.

I didn't get a say in whether I wanted to protect them in the first place- placing those people above the general population who have worked so hard for the minority without reward would be ridiculous.

[quote Nerdygirl]And people were told they were co me spinach theorists about this . What about the passports for the other vaccinations people don’t have . Measles for instance?

Glad to see Liberty see this as a major infringement of our rights

www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/libertys-view-on-immunity-passports/[/quote]
I personally would love a vaccine passport for measles. The idea that my 9 month old was in a nursery with unvaccinated kids when she was too young to have her vaccine freaked me out, but, I had to work.

There's also the rather large problem of children not being vaccinated.

While I'd love to go on a child-free flight, it's not exactly fair to tell families they can't travel.

I don't have too much issue with them being needed for international travel- what other countries choose it do is down to them.

But if the UK goes down the route of vaccine passports to be able to go the pub, the theatre, festivals etc I'll be disgusted.

People who are at very low risk of being hospitalised of the virus have given up an awful lot to protect those who are more vulnerable and the NHS (as @TwirpingBird says, its the same thing). It would be such a kick in the teeth to continue to restrict the young whilst their grandparents are able to resume 'living'.

One thing the government will surely want to consider is one of 'compliance'. I would have thought that they'd be concerned at the effect of introducing discriminatory vaccine passports on the compliance of teens/20s/30s etc; if young people are told they are going to still be restricted whilst the elderly get their freedom back, why on earth would they continue to comply with any of the current restrictions? I'd imagine the number of student house parties would skyrocket and I wouldn't blame them one bit. For those reasons too I could see vaccine passports for domestic use being counterproductive.

Exactly Lelophants... Have all those frothing at the bit for every single adult in the country to be vaccinated or should I say, to be immune through vaccination, actually thought about the logistics that would be necessary for that? Every year from now on?

@poppycat10

There's also the rather large problem of children not being vaccinated.

While I'd love to go on a child-free flight, it's not exactly fair to tell families they can't travel.

If they bring it out for kids I will be devastated. My entire family live abroad. My extended family will never meet my DDs. That's cruel.

No you are protecting the NHS, its for the people that have car accidents and need to attend hospital for treatment. It's for the people who find lumps that need investigating. The idea is to protect the NHS to ensure the services are available for everyone. Many shielders have long term condition that do not require regular visit to hospitals etc

@midgetem

No you are protecting the NHS, its for the people that have car accidents and need to attend hospital for treatment. It's for the people who find lumps that need investigating. The idea is to protect the NHS to ensure the services are available for everyone. Many shielders have long term condition that do not require regular visit to hospitals etc

But .... all those services are only at risk because of the coronavirus hospitalisations. The whole point of stay at home was so vulnerable people didnt get coronavirus, end up in hospital in such numbers thay means docs and nurses had to be taken from A&E or oncology etc to treat them. Its all linked. It's all about protecting a vulnerable person at the very start.

@midgetem

No you are protecting the NHS, its for the people that have car accidents and need to attend hospital for treatment. It's for the people who find lumps that need investigating. The idea is to protect the NHS to ensure the services are available for everyone. Many shielders have long term condition that do not require regular visit to hospitals etc

In many areas and specialties, the NHS was effectively closed. Increased cancer mortality, for example, is going to be horrific. Lockdown may have technically protected the NHS itself, but only because it largely ceased to operate outside of covid and select emergency treatment. Lockdown certainly didn't protect the people the NHS was meant to serve.

During lockdown (and in periods of slight relaxation of restrictions) our own appointments stopped and no one could be contacted.

I lived in the Middle East as a child in the 50s and 60s so was well used to carrying vaccine documents for travel.
We had official inserts that went in your passport detailing place, date and type of vaccines you had had.
They were not just for travel to 'foreign' countries, they were required whenever we returned to the UK too. (Because the diseases were endemic in several countries or regions) I recall the document being checked at passport control at Heathrow.
Off the top of my head the vaccinations were for smallpox, cholera, typhoid/paratyphoid, polio, tetanus and possibly HepC later on. Some had to be done every year.
It was only after smallpox was (virtually) eradicated that they were discontinued.

Oh frankly I'm sick of hearing about the sainted NHS anyway, it's failed many people for a very long time now anyway. I'm sorry for any offence caused to some of the fantastic people who work within it but it doesn't stop my statement from being true.

People who have always been considered healthy and low risk for the virus itself have a right to be concerned at the suggestion that the elderly/vulnerable be allowed to resume 'living' rather than merely existing whilst the rest of us carry on in this miserable state for longer.

I'd be very surprised if the government introduced them domestically for the reasons in my first post, but there really should be some consideration for the divisions and societal problems this would then cause, which would be awful given the increase of these divisions due to the pandemic anyway.

I think it is very sensible and most likely unavoidable if domestic businesses and other countries require them for admittance.

Things like mass gatherings at football stadiums and festivals would be a lot safer if everyone there was vaccinated, and if it means businesses can open up sooner and stay open, then that can only be a good thing.

I saw this as a TA in my 30s who will probably be one of the last to be vaccinated.

Say*

International travel will be vax passports or testing this summer. The cost of testing for say family of 4 will incentivise vax.

Asia and probably Australasia may well insist on vax next year onwards without the option of testing (probably quarantine for those not able/wanting to be vaccinated).

Children

@Randomschoolworker19

I think it is very sensible and most likely unavoidable if domestic businesses and other countries require them for admittance.

Things like mass gatherings at football stadiums and festivals would be a lot safer if everyone there was vaccinated, and if it means businesses can open up sooner and stay open, then that can only be a good thing.

I saw this as a TA in my 30s who will probably be one of the last to be vaccinated.

Safer for whom?

Given the elderly/vulnerable will be vaccinated well before football stadiums will be open to bigger crowds, just who are we protecting at that point?

I also believe it would be entirely counterproductive to the current compliance of younger people which would hardly help protect anyone but would be entirely understandable. It's complex, as Boris himself said last night; it really isn't as simple as vaccine passports making things safer. It's about the ethics of such a measure and the immediate harm it could cause, as well as long term effects.

Aren't all adults due to be offered vaccinations by the end of July?
By then hopefully we could have data on vaccinating children too and hence be on the way to herd immunity.
We're learning more about this virus all the time, from confident statements by the scientific community it seems very likely it will be able to be tweaked to combat different strains as they arise and to give everyone a relevant, adapted annual booster, much as is done for flu.

They're talking about introducing vaccine passports for domestic pubs etc on sky news, right now. Interview with Boris.

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

Safer for whom?

Given the elderly/vulnerable will be vaccinated well before football stadiums will be open to bigger crowds, just who are we protecting at that point?

I also believe it would be entirely counterproductive to the current compliance of younger people which would hardly help protect anyone but would be entirely understandable. It's complex, as Boris himself said last night; it really isn't as simple as vaccine passports making things safer. It's about the ethics of such a measure and the immediate harm it could cause, as well as long term effects.

I would expect vaccine passports to be rolled out once all adults have been offered a vaccine to avoid such ethical decisions. Children and those who cannot be vaccinated would obviously be exempt. For adults requiring an exemption I would expect you would need proof from your doctor, so you cannot just say you're exempt like people do with masks. Those people would be given an exemption version of the passport.

My main concern is vaccine uptake. Vaccine passports would undoubtedly increase the likelihood that people will be vaccinated if they knew there would be serious consequences for refusing.

You're anti-vax? Fine, that's your choice, now please stay away from me and everyone else.....

As for doctors and other health and social staff, as well as school staff as such as myself, I think you should be dismissed on grounds of gross negligence if you do not get vaccinated if you're not exempt.

We have to remember that non-vulnerable people are often vaccinated in order to reduce cases and transmission of viruses and diseases in order to help protect those who cannot be vaccinated. Not everyone can have the vaccine, not every vulnerable person is able to have the vaccine due to their specific conditions. So in ensuring most other people are vaccinated it helps protect those who can't be. At present this will include vulnerable (CEV and CV) children who can't yet be vaccinated.

And as said before, most talk of this has been an either or situation. Vaccine proof OR a negative test.

Given large scale events aren't due to begin until much later when more of the adult population will have been offered their first vaccination, and wasn't talked about until stage 4 opening - which is towards the end of June at the earliest I think there is plenty of time for those in charge to make it workable.

The media or government, not sure which, has to give everything a silly dramatic name and the whole country latches on to it. So basically, proof of vaccination is required for certain activities. Fine . Yellow fever certificates have been required for travel for years now.
For every day activities like going to the theatre ? Why the hell not if it helps to keep them open. I dont see the issue. People just like repeatedly saying " vaccine passports " in outrage, it's silly.

Boris mentioned a "couple of months" to make a decision on domestic vaccine passports. He's making all the right noises about discrimination but, frankly, he's lying. I believe he doesn't want to discriminate, but I also don't believe he won't discriminate.

A couple of months = groups 1-9, not all adults. We must also remember that there is pressure to share our vaccines abroad once we've vaccinated 1-9, which would cause the speed of rollout to fall due to supply constraint - and that delivery to push out beyond August. Kids aren't even on the horizon.

With that in mind, how would the vulnerable feel if passports were mandated only for vulnerable and not for the under 50s?

That's the only way this could be rolled out in a couple of months, unless the young and healthy are to be compelled to remain at home.