All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

Dark Side of the Principles of Non-discrimination and Proportionality : the Case of Mandatory Vaccination

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11220%2F25%3A10466478" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11220/25:10466478 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Result on the web

    <a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=chmZvvVo0d" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=chmZvvVo0d</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme-2023-108998" target="_blank" >10.1136/jme-2023-108998</a>

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    Dark Side of the Principles of Non-discrimination and Proportionality : the Case of Mandatory Vaccination

  • Original language description

    Deciding the conflict between various rights and interests, especially in medical ethics where health and lives are in question, has significant challenges, and to obtain appropriate outcomes, it is necessary to properly apply the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality. Using the example of mandatory vaccination policies, we show that this task becomes even more difficult when these principles lead us to counterintuitive and paradoxical results. Although the general purpose of these principles is to ensure that decisions and policies seek the highest and broadest possible enjoyment of rights for all (i.e., the least restrictive solution), they achieve the complete opposite when applied to mandatory vaccination policies. To highlight and explain these paradoxical results, we present a typology of fifteen hypothetical mandatory vaccination policies containing various degrees of restriction and apply well-established non-discrimination and proportionality tests from constitutional law to each. We argue that mandatory vaccination policies exhibit two characteristics, namely the non-linear relationship between their general purposes and specific goals and the involvement of life and health, suggesting that more restrictive policies should prevail even though less restrictive policies might fail these tests. Using clearly structured and rigorous methodology from constitutional law, the proposed approach delivers a fresh view on the core ethical principles of non-discrimination and proportionality and a potentially useful tool in helping resolve also other challenges encountered in medical ethics beyond mandatory vaccination policies.

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

  • CEP classification

  • OECD FORD branch

    50501 - Law

Result continuities

  • Project

    <a href="/en/project/LX22NPO5101" target="_blank" >LX22NPO5101: The National Institute for Research on the Socioeconomic Impact of Diseases and Systemic Risks</a><br>

  • Continuities

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)<br>S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Others

  • Publication year

    2025

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Data specific for result type

  • Name of the periodical

    Journal of Medical Ethics

  • ISSN

    0306-6800

  • e-ISSN

    1473-4257

  • Volume of the periodical

    2025

  • Issue of the periodical within the volume

    10

  • Country of publishing house

    GB - UNITED KINGDOM

  • Number of pages

    10

  • Pages from-to

    700-709

  • UT code for WoS article

    001049631500001

  • EID of the result in the Scopus database