Tennis star Novak Djokovic has found himself at the centre of an international controversy over his decision to refrain from vaccinating at the cost of access to international tennis tournaments like the Australian Open, the Roland-Garros, and potentially, Wimbledon. He sat down recently for an interview with BBC reporter Amol Rajan.
My sentiments too. However, I have a little ethical issue around your tentative hypothetical support that if it were a sterilising vaccine there would be a case to be made for forced vaccination or Austrian style tyranny of locking down the unvaccinated. I don’t think there’s ever a case to forcibly medicate or imprison someone against their will to protect others. I think it’s important we tease this out because it’s only a matter of time before they develop some sterilising vaccine and we’re back to square one. My thinking is that Utilitarianism needs to be confined to the dustbin of history, all forms of it. It’s the ethical principle that public health operates on and we’ve seen the damage it’s done, as if it wasn’t predictable from history. I hate all utilitarian thinking!
Well said, David. I always enjoy your blogs, but never comment. Figured it was time to show you weren't just talking into cyberspace! The BBC interviewer was comical in his responses, but Djokovic was outstanding - principled, ethical, rational. As you pointed out, he defended bodily autonomy and informed consent.
My sentiments too. However, I have a little ethical issue around your tentative hypothetical support that if it were a sterilising vaccine there would be a case to be made for forced vaccination or Austrian style tyranny of locking down the unvaccinated. I don’t think there’s ever a case to forcibly medicate or imprison someone against their will to protect others. I think it’s important we tease this out because it’s only a matter of time before they develop some sterilising vaccine and we’re back to square one. My thinking is that Utilitarianism needs to be confined to the dustbin of history, all forms of it. It’s the ethical principle that public health operates on and we’ve seen the damage it’s done, as if it wasn’t predictable from history. I hate all utilitarian thinking!
What struck me was the BBC interviewer's amazement that Djokovic was so principled, clearly not a pre-requistite for working for the BBC.
Well said, David. I always enjoy your blogs, but never comment. Figured it was time to show you weren't just talking into cyberspace! The BBC interviewer was comical in his responses, but Djokovic was outstanding - principled, ethical, rational. As you pointed out, he defended bodily autonomy and informed consent.
just fyi, not a view i subscribe to https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1493687636795568128.html
Thanks , the full interview is 50 mins though