Stigmatized for standing up for my child: A qualitative study of non-vaccinating parents in Australia.
Australia
Childhood vaccination
Immunization
Public health
Qualitative research
Stigma
Vaccine refusal
Journal
SSM - population health
ISSN: 2352-8273
Titre abrégé: SSM Popul Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101678841
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
05
04
2021
revised:
15
09
2021
accepted:
15
09
2021
entrez:
4
10
2021
pubmed:
5
10
2021
medline:
5
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Vaccine refusal is highly polarizing in Australia, producing a challenging social landscape for non-vaccinating parents. We sought to understand the lived experience of non-vaccinating parents in contemporary Australia. We recruited a national sample of non-vaccinating parents of children <18 yrs, advertising on national radio, in playgrounds in low vaccination areas, and using snowballing. Grounded Theory methodology guided data collection (via semi-structured interviews). Inductive analysis identified stigmatization as a central concept; stigma theory was adopted as an analytical lens. Twenty-one parents from regional and urban locations in five states were interviewed. Parent's described experiences point to systematic stigmatization which can be characterized using Link & Phelan's five-step process. Parents experienced (1) labelling and (2) stereotyping, with many not identifying with the "anti-vaxxers" portrayed in the media and describing frustration at being labelled as such, believing they were defending their child from harm. Participants described (3) social "othering", leading to relationship loss and social isolation, and (4) status loss and discrimination, feeling "brushed off" as incompetent parents and discriminated against by medical professionals and other parents. Finally, (5) legislative changes exerted power over their circumstances, rendering them unable to provide their children with the same financial and educational opportunities as vaccinated children, often increasing their steadfastness in refusing vaccination. Non-vaccinating Australian parents feel stigmatized for defending their child from perceived risk of harm, reporting a range of social and psychological effects, as well as financial effects from policies which disadvantaged their children through differential financial treatment, and diminished early childhood educational opportunities. While it might be argued that social stigma and exclusionary policies directed a small minority for the greater good are justified, other more nuanced approaches based on better understandings of vaccine rejection could achieve comparable public health outcomes without the detrimental effect on unvaccinated families.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Vaccine refusal is highly polarizing in Australia, producing a challenging social landscape for non-vaccinating parents. We sought to understand the lived experience of non-vaccinating parents in contemporary Australia.
METHODS
METHODS
We recruited a national sample of non-vaccinating parents of children <18 yrs, advertising on national radio, in playgrounds in low vaccination areas, and using snowballing. Grounded Theory methodology guided data collection (via semi-structured interviews). Inductive analysis identified stigmatization as a central concept; stigma theory was adopted as an analytical lens.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twenty-one parents from regional and urban locations in five states were interviewed. Parent's described experiences point to systematic stigmatization which can be characterized using Link & Phelan's five-step process. Parents experienced (1) labelling and (2) stereotyping, with many not identifying with the "anti-vaxxers" portrayed in the media and describing frustration at being labelled as such, believing they were defending their child from harm. Participants described (3) social "othering", leading to relationship loss and social isolation, and (4) status loss and discrimination, feeling "brushed off" as incompetent parents and discriminated against by medical professionals and other parents. Finally, (5) legislative changes exerted power over their circumstances, rendering them unable to provide their children with the same financial and educational opportunities as vaccinated children, often increasing their steadfastness in refusing vaccination.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Non-vaccinating Australian parents feel stigmatized for defending their child from perceived risk of harm, reporting a range of social and psychological effects, as well as financial effects from policies which disadvantaged their children through differential financial treatment, and diminished early childhood educational opportunities. While it might be argued that social stigma and exclusionary policies directed a small minority for the greater good are justified, other more nuanced approaches based on better understandings of vaccine rejection could achieve comparable public health outcomes without the detrimental effect on unvaccinated families.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34604497
doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100926
pii: S2352-8273(21)00201-9
pmc: PMC8473775
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100926Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no interests to declare.
Références
J Paediatr Child Health. 2017 May;53(5):439-444
pubmed: 28168768
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 May 22;15(5):
pubmed: 29789482
Eur J Public Health. 2016 Jun;26(3):378-81
pubmed: 26297722
Nature. 2019 Jul;571(7766):469-472
pubmed: 31332351
Med J Aust. 2020 Oct;213(8):364-369
pubmed: 32951230
Health Educ Q. 1988 Winter;15(4):351-77
pubmed: 3068205
Vaccine. 2013 Apr 18;31 Suppl 2:B1-2
pubmed: 23598469
Vaccine. 2018 Mar 14;36(12):1621-1626
pubmed: 29449097
Curr Psychol. 2022;41(9):6210-6224
pubmed: 33071526
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Jul;257:112015
pubmed: 30442504
Med J Aust. 2016 Apr 18;204(7):275
pubmed: 27078604
Public Health. 2020 Mar;180:38-45
pubmed: 31838344
Vaccine. 2018 Oct 22;36(44):6556-6558
pubmed: 28830694
Vaccine. 2019 Sep 20;37(40):5986-5993
pubmed: 31451326
Lancet. 2006 Feb 11;367(9509):528-9
pubmed: 16473129
Vaccine. 2018 Oct 22;36(44):6480-6490
pubmed: 29395532
Soc Sci Med. 2015 Dec;147:222-31
pubmed: 26599625
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Oct;263:113259
pubmed: 32799028
J Public Health Policy. 2018 May;39(2):156-169
pubmed: 29358695
Pediatrics. 2019 Jun;143(6):
pubmed: 31113831
Bioethics. 2013 Feb;27(2):74-80
pubmed: 21797912
Soc Sci Med. 2016 May;157:103-10
pubmed: 27082021
Med Anthropol Q. 2015 Sep;29(3):381-99
pubmed: 25847214
Soc Sci Med. 2017 Jul;185:127-136
pubmed: 28578210
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 12;12(10):e0185955
pubmed: 29023499
Soc Sci Med. 2008 Aug;67(3):463-72
pubmed: 18502551