It will probably take careful legislation to prevent those who can't be vaccinated from being relegated to second class citizens alongside those who won't get vaccinated. At the end of the day both groups still pose an infection risk.
My expectation is that most businesses will have some official policy of "you must be vaccinated to enter" but they won't actually enforce it. This decreases their liability on both sides (Don't want to be seen inviting outbreaks, but don't want to deal with HIPAA / privacy laws).
I was surprised to learn that the US already has a list of required vaccines for legal immigration[1]. I think its very likely the Covid-19 vaccine makes the list, considering even the flu vaccine is required.
[1] https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-b-chapter-...
That vaccine is actually relatively risky. Yellow fever is a serious disease, and the vaccine from weakened - but not killed - yellow fever virus. Thus very occasionally it causes what's basically yellow fever. That's still much safer than the risk of getting yellow fever if you are visiting a place like Kenya. But at least where I live, doctors won't give it to you without confirming where exactly you are travelling, because the otherwise the risk/benefit tradeoff isn't worth it.
That certificate at least has zero security features, and could easily be faked.
Suddenly you have a case of international fraud while bedridden in a country that takes yellow fever very seriously.
People traveling to Kenya will want to vaccine for their health and largely won't try to fake it.
In practice, given all that has happened since the last election, I expect the current UK government solution to show all the skill of a bored teenager mimicking Jackson Pollock in a school art class.
Which would be somewhat discriminating against those people. But if the vaccination works as promised (95%), it should allow some nonvaccinated people without problems?
There's a good chance they do in fact reduce the spread of COVID-19 too in a significant way, as many vaccines achieve that. But some don't.
The second issue, is that we don't have enough data yet to know if the vaccines prevent severe COVID-19, let alone deaths, in the people most at risk. That at least we'll probably find out soon from the UK.
1) https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-c...
Is any country issuing a proof of vaccination document? If they don't have a system already in place to issue these, I think it's unlikely they will be able to roll it out at this point.
Basically, I'll believe it when I see it. To me it seems like a very hard thing to enforce and implement. I suspect the companies are more interested in "security theater" to facilitate normal business operations as soon as possible than actually excluding people who haven't been vaccinated.
Put differently, when asked, you are not obliged to answer any questions about whether or not you are vaccinated. For instance, if I ask you whether you had a flu shot last year, you do not have to answer me.
What about public authorities? Same thing applies, unless vaccination is legally mandatory. Then we'd have a different discussion.
Finally, how many private businesses are willing to risk a court case over refusal of service because a patron isn't willing to divulge medical information? Not to mention potential violations of discrimination laws.
Reserving service isn't straightforward. Especially not when it comes to sharing private medical information e.g. when someone wasn't vaccinated because of an autoimmune disease.
Your exact medical condition is no concern of that business, and one shouldn't be forced to give up that information lest risking to be barred from service.
It's for this reason why many businesses have terms and conditions pointing out to customers the role of personal responsibility, and asking them to waive their right to legal action. Moreover, let's not forget the existence of business insurance that protects from calamities.
If vaccination can't be mandated through public action because there's not enough support, then that comes with consequences for the general public. One of them would be that the relationship between owner and patron gets burdened by a new liability. The question then is whether or not the harm of publicly mandated vaccination outstrips the harm caused by that liability in everyday life.
> What about public authorities? Same thing applies, unless vaccination is legally mandatory. Then we'd have a different discussion.
Everything you mention is the "different discussion" in that statement.
My comment was a rebuke against what is mentioned in the grandparent comment:
> but will be individually implemented by each private org
Private organisations - restaurants, shops, music venues, malls, theatres,... - may try and ask for personal medical information, but you are not obliged to divulge anything to them.
Private organisations barring entrance because you are unwilling to disclose personal medical information: I'm wondering how well that would hold up in a legal case.
For instance, you have an autoimmune disease and you can't get vaccinated. You present at a restaurant. You are asked "are you vaccinated?". If you answer the question truthfully with "no" but you don't want to disclose your medical condition, you likely risk getting barred anyway. So, now you are in a position where you need to make a trade off: divulge your medical condition - which isn't any of the restaurant's business - in hopes of gaining access (no guarantee) or keep silent.
See where this is going? The problem isn't people who are against vaccination, it's the potential of creating legal hurdles for people who can't get vaccinated due to a medical condition which may bar them from participating in society. That's just not okay.
Moreover, if private venues are afraid of being the butt of an infection cluster (e.g. as a result of contact tracing) then they ought to insure themselves. That would be not much different from insuring oneself from other liabilities such as a patron tripping and breaking their arm in theme park. This is also the very reason why many venues have warnings and provide waivers to patrons giving up the right to take legal action against the venue.
Lastly, the article you quote specifically focusses on choosing to not get vaccinated based on philosophical or religious arguments within a public context: getting educated at a public school. Which is a different category of legal challenges. Moreover, the conclusion of the article is that tort law is only a second best approach to publicly mandated vaccination within that category.
That companies are advocating for "passports" is more than likely an expression against anti vaccination sentiments and a desire to open for business whatever the costs.
Also, you raise an interesting dichotomy between those who can't VS those who won't that I hadn't considered.
The certificate booklet has space for other vaccinations.
Booklet: https://tourseastafrica.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/yellowca...
There are NHS vaccination reminder cards which you'll be given at your first appointment and recommended to keep in your wallet - with sticker(s) of what dates you had / will have jabs, and a little info about how to find out more info.
This is standard NHS practise for vaccinations that require multiple spaced out injections - I've had two cards pretty much identical to the photo I've seen of the covid ones in the last few years, for other vaccines from the NHS.
The UK's Health Minister confirmed to Sky News yesterday morning that they are not for providing proof you've been vaccinated, and that they do not need to be kept after your final injection.
Should public authorities keep a record of whether or not you've been vaccinated?
Vaccination is a medical procedure. As such, whether someone is or isn't vaccinated could be considered a private matter (patient-doctor confidentiality), just like any other medical treatment.
If vaccination became mandatory, we'd have a different discussion. But if it's not, a public government has little argument to keep a record about your medical history, and, even less so, divulge that information to private actors.
Can private actors - venues, hotels, restaurants,... - force someone to divulge medical information?
No. They can't. They could ask, but you're not obliged to answer anything related to your medical history.
Could they refuse entrance if you refuse to provide medical information?
I'm curious when the first legal cases will pop up where someone decides to take a venue to court because they were actively refused entrance over being unwilling to divulge medical information.