Joaquín P. announced this in his family chat Next week he will travel to Miami for work and he has already secured a vaccination role at the airport. The controversy didn’t take long to be triggered. His brothers debated each other if he was morally fit. That is, does he wait patiently in line until his turn comes, or is it okay for him to come forward and fortify himself outside? Since Joaquín is not a risky group and is 47 years old, waiting for his turn in the country will require at least a year and a half of waiting. “The issue is who would get hurt if I had been vaccinated before? It’s not a lack of solidarity. It’s not like getting vaccinated with dignitaries either, I don’t replace anyone,” said Joaquin. Attitudes were rife, even on one side and the other of the rift. But they are not the only ones.
A few hours ago, controversy erupted in the networks after it was learned that former President Mauricio Macri had traveled to the United States and was vaccinated against COVID-19 there. More and more Argentines are traveling to destinations such as Miami or New York and being vaccinated there, where they are being enabled and in some destinations the vaccination of foreigners is promoted. There are other countries even seeking to take advantage of this attraction to promote travel destinations, the so-called vaccine tourism. But what ethical dilemmas do play a role when faced with a decision of this nature, which immediately means that those who decide to travel are not exempt from disputes over their environment?
There are three cases. The overall need for a vaccine. The difficulty of providing the health system for them and the solidarity of other countries that have a lot of vaccinations and offering them free of charge to foreigners. The fact that there are people who can travel and get vaccinated abroad does not get vaccinated from the locals but quite the opposite. Away from the image of the rich man traveling and the poor the rest, the benefit is everyone. Is there a place of excellence? Anyone who gets vaccinated in Miami does not get vaccinated from any Argentine. Those who did it using political force did. What is injustice or illegality? Robin Rivello, director of the University of Central Asia’s Institute of Bioethics.
To assess whether it is positive or negative, we have to ask ourselves the following: Is it prohibited by law? No. Do they harm the health system? No. Is it unethical? As for. He does not creep in line. It’s making another row, “he adds.
The issue does not fall outside the crack. VIP vaccination or Miami vaccination. The statement, which was circulated on the networks, indicated the number of official officials and those close to the authority who were vaccinated with the so-called vaccination of VIPs; On the other side of the rift, the others are against those who have been vaccinated abroad. Dialectics is assumed Conflict between society and individual valuesAs if the man’s battle against himself had begun.
“It seems to me to be a selfish attitudeThis indicates that he is not feeling part of the whole. It acts as if you are not part of the community in which you live. Epidemic strikes us all. The virus is democratic. It is not a problem for everyone. Each one has a responsibility towards himself and the community. We are a cell in a living organism, “asks the sociologist and the author of the articles Sergio Sinai. “Whoever left because he has the economic potential, ignore the society that he is a part of. On top of that, a lot of reviewing is done. It is the new luxury for some. Traveling to Miami and getting vaccinated is even an excuse for a vacation that would otherwise be shameful. It’s a complete lack of empathy. We are in a dangerous situation that requires us to be in solidarity. Instead, the suggestion is how can I do this, and it was not my turn. MIt looks like we’re first class from the Titanic, and some say to me there’s a boat. Others, spoiled. I’m saving myself, “Senai adds indignantly.
It does not respond to any logic. There is no ethical dilemma. This means that in some ways, [vacunarse en el exterior] Trespassing, harming someone, or leaving it to fate. She doesn’t have any of all of that. Lives in a dire situation and those who are vaccinated look bad but It’s just some kind of envy. The alleged motive is a sacrificial version of the epidemic. If we don’t receive them all, nobody will receive them. But this approach is pointless. ” Psychiatrist and writer Jose Eduardo Al-Abadi.
“there he isThe real drama is that someone tops the list over another. This is not a VIP vaccination. There are countries that have vaccines available and offer them. Everyone who does not travel and waits in our turn are victims of the shortcomings and poor planning of a country. We are unjust victims of an unjust reality. However, this does not make the person who arrives legally guilty. It’s like thinking that whoever eats the cake takes it from me. In fact, Al-Abadi continues, he highlights the difference between us and a developed country.
“It’s a false excuse to say that I don’t get vaccinated from anyone. Because it wasn’t their turn yet. They traveled to get vaccinated before.” Here we all line up. You will have to wait more or less but that will get to you, “Senai says.
It is easy to try to raise the issue in terms of whether it is true or false. But there are other issues to consider. Public health around the world has shown that only countries with far-sighted and economically strong have been able to cover their populations with vaccinations, and even have been able to overvaccinate. These countries jointly apply to foreigners free of charge. ¿What they do is different than what we do when we attend health tours that come from Bolivia or Paraguay? But here, when we Argentines receive it, the situation changes. It’s an ideological question, “adds Revello.
Split or false argument?
“One can think of this issue in terms of dualism. Society versus the individual,” Raise Luis Fernandez, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor at De Tila University and author of the book Foucault and Liberalism. “A vision states that one owes a debt with the community and must assimilate the community beyond its resources and social standing. After that, everyone must be vaccinated in his place of origin, depending on this religion. This position views those who will be vaccinated abroad as not very supportive or The other position is that there is no duty towards society, but a person can be vaccinated according to his resources.If I can buy it, I will give it to me in the country.But since it does not exist, the only opportunity is to travel and be vaccinated abroad. A false dilemma appears. Indeed, those who have the resources, return to the country and insert themselves are already immune to their society. At the same time, it releases a vaccine for use by someone who may not be able to travel, ”Fernandez says.
“What about the person who has the resource and wants to use it? Why can’t I do that? I don’t see a fundamentally contradictory position. The state should provide public health and provide vaccinations and medicines for the population, especially the population without resources.” But those vaccinated abroad, however, cooperate with the general population and with herd immunity“He adds. He explains that the proposal is not a healthy or ethical endeavor but rather a political-ideological dilemma.” The proposal is presented as follows: What is an ideological privilege: organic and community, and thus the audience over the individual? Or is the priority for the individual and the private? It is a false dichotomy, because for the purposes of vaccination, everyone who is vaccinated abroad contributes to society, “he concludes.
