Compulsoriedade da vacinação infantil para COVID-19

Ana Carolina  Moraes Aboin Menequelli; Ana Paula  Rodrigues Selhorst

doi:10.36489/saudecoletiva.2022v12i73p9573-9586

Authors

Ana Carolina Moraes Aboin Menequelli Doutoranda em Direito Civil pela FDUSP. Mestre em Direito Civil pela FDUSP. Bacharela em Direito pela FDRP-USP. Especialista em Direito Médico pela Universidade de Coimbra-Portugal. Advogada. Professora de Direito Privado pela UNEMAT. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9090-6572
Ana Paula Rodrigues Selhorst Graduanda em Direito pela Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso - Campus Universitário de Alta Floresta. Estagiária na Defensoria Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso, núcleo Alta Floresta. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8968-5274

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36489/saudecoletiva.2022v12i73p9573-9586

Keywords:

Vacinação, Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido, Efeitos adversos

Abstract

Law n. 13.979/2020 provided for the possibility of compulsory vaccination for combating the coronavirus pandemic, and the Supreme Court decided that compulsory vaccination is distinct from forced vaccination, and the person's consent must be obtained and allowed its refusal, but indirect measures may be adopted. The National Plan for the Operationalization of Vaccination against Covid-19 included the vaccination of children from 12 years of age, after approval of the Pfizer vaccine by Anvisa. There is, however, an conflict: what are the ethical and legal obstacles placed before compulsory child vaccination? This study tackles two of these obstacles: informed consent process versus compulsory vaccination, and the absence of a national policy of reparation for adverse effects. It is concluded, then, that the child vaccination program against Covid-19 must guarantee the necessary safety for individual health, in order to conciliate public interest and collective health without abandoning fundamental individual rights.