COVID-19 vaccine Mandates: An Australian attitudinal study

Katie Attwell; Marco Rizzi; Lara McKenzie; Samantha J Carlson; Leah Roberts; Sian Tomkinson; Christopher C Blyth

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.11.056

COVID-19 vaccine Mandates: An Australian attitudinal study

Vaccine. 2022 Dec 5;40(51):7360-7369. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.11.056. Epub 2021 Nov 30.

Authors

Katie Attwell¹, Marco Rizzi², Lara McKenzie³, Samantha J Carlson⁴, Leah Roberts³, Sian Tomkinson³, Christopher C Blyth⁵

Affiliations

¹ School of Social Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia; Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Perth, WA, Australia. Electronic address: katie.attwell@uwa.edu.au.
² UWA Law School, The University of Western Australia, Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
³ School of Social Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
⁴ School of Social Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia; Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Perth, WA, Australia.
⁵ Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Perth, WA, Australia; UWA Medical School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.

Abstract

Background: The rollout of vaccines against COVID-19 is prompting governments and the private sector to adopt mandates. However, there has been little conceptual analysis of the types of mandates available, nor empirical analysis of how the public thinks about different mandates and why. Our conceptual study examines available instruments, how they have been implemented pre-COVID, and their use for COVID-19 globally. Then, our qualitative study reports the acceptability of such measures in Western Australia, which has experienced very limited community transmission, posing an interesting scenario for vaccine acceptance and acceptability of measures to enforce it.

Method: Our conceptual study developed categories of mandates from extant work, news reports, and legislative interventions globally. Then, our empirical study asked 44 West Australians about their attitudes towards potential mandatory policies, with data analysed using NVivo 12.

Results: Our novel studies contribute richness and depth to emerging literature on the types and varying acceptability of vaccine requirements. Participants demonstrated tensions and confusion about whether instruments were incentives or punishments, and many supported strong consequences for non-vaccination even if they ostensibly opposed mandates. Those attached to restrictions for disease prevention were most popular. There were similar degrees of support for mandates imposed by employers or businesses, with participants showing little concern for potential issues of accountability linked to public health decisions delegated to the private sector. Participants mostly supported tightly regulated medical exemptions granted by specialists, with little interest in religious or personal belief exemptions.

Conclusion: Our participants are used to being governed by vaccine mandates, and now by rigorous lockdown and travel restrictions that have ensured limited local COVID-19 disease and transmission. These factors appear influential in their general openness to COVID-19 vaccine mandates, especially when linked explicitly to the prevention of disease in high-risk settings.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Australia
COVID-19 Vaccines
COVID-19* / prevention & control
Communicable Disease Control
Humans
Vaccines*

Substances

COVID-19 Vaccines
Vaccines