Attitudes towards mandatory vaccination and sanctions for vaccination refusal

Abstract

<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Investigating attitudes towards mandatory vaccination and sanctions for vaccination refusal in an area with insufficient vaccination coverage may help health authorities to assess which strategies for increasing vaccination coverage are appropriate. This study examines attitudes to vaccine mandates and asks questions regarding what kinds of sanctions could legitimately result from vaccination refusal. It seeks to find out if people's attitudes towards mandates and towards sanctions for vaccination refusal are related to their attitudes to vaccines and the degree of trust they feel towards health care professionals and health care authorities. The study also discusses how the observed attitudes towards mandates may be related to perceptions of autonomy, responsibility, and equitability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data collection was carried out in Finland through an online survey in a region with suboptimal vaccine uptake. Statistical analysis was conducted on a sample of 1101 respondents, using confirmatory factor analysis and structural regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Persons hold different views on mandates and sanctions. Importantly, the persons who support vaccination mandates and sanctions for vaccination refusal are to a great degree the same people who have positive attitudes to vaccines and high trust in health care professionals and health authorities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Trust is a key factor which has a bearing on people's attitudes towards mandates and sanctions for noncompliance. A focus on the reasons for lack of trust, and on how to enhance trust, is a more feasible long-term way (than mandates) to promote large- scale compliance with childhood vaccine programmes in the studied country context.</p>