Vaccines, Informed Consent, Effective Remedy and Integral Reparation: An International Human Rights Perspective

Abstract

<p>Este artículo evalúa críticamente el debate sobre la seguridad de las vacunas y la libertad de elección desde una perspectiva de derechos humanos. Propone un balance entre la salud pública como interés legítimo y la protección de los derechos individuales, y sugiere que este debate debe ser informado por los principios del derecho internacional de los derechos humanos. La sección I explica la premisa básica de que el consentimiento informado es la regla general para cualquier intervención médica y que la libertad de elección frente a la vacunación es un derecho humano. Partiendo de la base de que las intervenciones médicas violan el derecho a la privacidad y la integridad física, la limitación a estos derechos es legítima solo si la política de vacunación del Estado está provista por ley, y es estrictamente necesaria y proporcional. La sección II describe las obligaciones internacionales en relación con los recursos efectivos que un Estado que decide adoptar una política de vacunación debe ofrecer en relación con posibles daños, aun cuando estos sean atribuibles a conductas de particulares. La parte III desarrolla el concepto de reparación integral y explica por qué si una política de vacunación obligatoria es promulgada sin cumplir los criterios para la limitación de derechos humanos, se produce un hecho ilícito internacional y surge un deber de reparar. </p>

Informed Consent in Mass Vaccination against COVID-19 in Romania: Implications of Bad Management

“…The law mandates that information be supplied directly by the physician and tailored to each patient. Therefore, the patients were entitled to receive not only general information about the inherent dangers of the vaccines but also about risks specific to each patient [28]. Under no circumstances should media or online sources substitute for physicians' medical information.…”

Informed Consent and Public Health

“…The Explanatory Report to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and the Dignity of Human Being with Regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (hereinafter Oviedo Convention) can help us determine more precisely what constitutes informed consent today. The report states that the patient's consent can be deemed free when given without any external pressure, and informed, when based on information provided by health professionals about the nature and possible consequences of medical intervention and its alternatives (Oviedo Convention, 1997, paragraph 35;Acosta López, 2015). The term "intervention" is used in this Convention in a broad sense to cover all "medical acts", including those undertaken for the purpose of preventive care (Oviedo Convention, 1997, paragraph 34;Acosta López, 2015).…”

“…The report states that the patient's consent can be deemed free when given without any external pressure, and informed, when based on information provided by health professionals about the nature and possible consequences of medical intervention and its alternatives (Oviedo Convention, 1997, paragraph 35;Acosta López, 2015). The term "intervention" is used in this Convention in a broad sense to cover all "medical acts", including those undertaken for the purpose of preventive care (Oviedo Convention, 1997, paragraph 34;Acosta López, 2015). 3…”

Compulsory Vaccinations against Covid-19 versus the Right to Respect for Private Life

“…It is therefore a "clear example of pure prevention treatment" and as such "can only be carried out with informed consent, except under very extraordinary circumstances. This rule is developed in international bioethics declarations, human rights instruments and human rights jurisprudence and doctrine" (Acosta, 2015).…”