Why?

[baggiebloke]

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/heal...d-vaccine/

[Kit Kat Chunky]

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/heal...d-vaccine/

Make it mandatory. 

They then have a choice to make.

[tiptontown]

It's a tough one to pass judgement on. Peoples right to choose against the protection of vulnerable people.
Can't help feeling though, people who are in a position of care should have the vaccine unless for health reasons and is very selfish not to.

[Tom Joad]

Just a thought, is that about the national average overall? It's a tough one. It's still a  new vaccine and I understand many will have concerns. I do myself although I went ahead with the jabs as I see no other practical alternative.
Of that 4+%, there are probably a wide range of reasons for the opt out. It would be constructive to address each reason individually to make inroads.

[Ossian]

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/heal...d-vaccine/

Make it mandatory. 

They then have a choice to make.

I'm pretty sure an existing law has already been amended (sometime last year) to deal with some of the specifics of the Covid pandemic; no idea if mandatory vaccination was discussed, but it certainly wasn't added to the statute. 

Difficult one: in principle I couldn't go along with mandatory vaccination, but I do think that, in certain work environments, continuing to hold out is probably ill-advised. I can't say that I was over the moon about having double dosage of a vaccine produced and tested to such an expedited timetable - it was a question of balancing the risks.

[baggiebloke]

Many more non-white people (than white) believe in the "natural" way.

I've heard this said repeatedly.

[Derek Hardballs]

It’s not imo difficult the rights of those who are vulnerable should not be put at risk by those who choose to do so knowingly through opting out of having the vaccine. If they want to work in healthcare then they have the jab or they have to tell those they are looking after that they opted out and then allow the vulnerable person or their family the choice of someone else looking after them. I have zero tolerance towards those who put their rights above their responsibilities within this sector. Many professions insist on getting vaccinated for things like Hep B and various other diseases including the health sector etc so let’s not go down the route of arguing it’s against their civil liberties.

[Birdman1811]

It’s not imo difficult the rights of those who are vulnerable should not be put at risk by those who choose to do so knowingly through opting out of having the vaccine. If they want to work in healthcare then they have the jab or they have to tell those they are looking after that they opted out and then allow the vulnerable person or their family the choice of someone else looking after them. I have zero tolerance towards those who put their rights above their responsibilities within this sector. Many professions insist on getting vaccinated for things like Hep B and various other diseases including the health sector etc so let’s not go down the route of arguing it’s against their civil liberties.

Agree completely.

[Tom Joad]

It’s not imo difficult the rights of those who are vulnerable should not be put at risk by those who choose to do so knowingly through opting out of having the vaccine. If they want to work in healthcare then they have the jab or they have to tell those they are looking after that they opted out and then allow the vulnerable person or their family the choice of someone else looking after them. I have zero tolerance towards those who put their rights above their responsibilities within this sector. Many professions insist on getting vaccinated for things like Hep B and various other diseases including the health sector etc so let’s not go down the route of arguing it’s against their civil liberties.

I totally understand your point. I just think it also understandable there are concerns over a vaccine this new. My guess is the only way to deal with the reluctance is to deal with each reason individually and dispel the hokum while recognising those with real hesitancy.

[Derek Hardballs]

It’s not imo difficult the rights of those who are vulnerable should not be put at risk by those who choose to do so knowingly through opting out of having the vaccine. If they want to work in healthcare then they have the jab or they have to tell those they are looking after that they opted out and then allow the vulnerable person or their family the choice of someone else looking after them. I have zero tolerance towards those who put their rights above their responsibilities within this sector. Many professions insist on getting vaccinated for things like Hep B and various other diseases including the health sector etc so let’s not go down the route of arguing it’s against their civil liberties.

I totally understand your point. I just think it also understandable there are concerns over a vaccine this new. My guess is the only way to deal with the reluctance is to deal with each reason individually and dispel the hokum while recognising those with real hesitancy.

Which is fine, but not whilst they are employed to look after the most vulnerable. Where are their rights in all this? Many I know would love the vaccine but currently can’t have it in this category and it’s a double slap in the face to firstly find out that those who can have, won’t have it and secondly finding they are still at risk of severe illness and can’t have it. I will always put the rights of the vulnerable first in this argument. Those who choose not to have the jab have a choice those who are vulnerable did not choose to be vulnerable or be treated / cared for by someone who could potentially put them at greater risk.