检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:鲍律帆 BAO Lyufan(College of Public Security,Zhejiang Police College,Hangzhou 310053,China)
出 处:《医学与哲学》2025年第3期57-61,共5页Medicine and Philosophy
摘 要:在美国,强制性免疫的相关事务主要由州警察权予以规定。雅格布森案以来,政府要求公民接种疫苗的权力受到了法院的持续肯定。尽管人们对于这一权力的质疑没有动摇强制性免疫的制度根基,但是,强制性免疫也并未褪变为“全民接种”的代名词。免疫豁免作为强制性免疫的制度例外,不仅弥合了政府强制与公民自主之间的缝隙,而且保障了强制性免疫的制度弹性。我国法律也赋予了政府制定疫苗接种规划的权力,但在绝对的强制性免疫要求下,适当允许免疫豁免的存在可能是平衡个人自由与公共利益的有效方式。In the U.S.,affairs relating to the compulsory immunization are mainly regulated by state police powers.Since the Jacobson case,the government's power to require citizens to be vaccinated has been consistently affirmed by the courts.Although skepticism surrounding this authority has not shaken the foundation of the compulsory immunization system,it has not transformed into a universal vaccination mandate.Immunization exemptions,as an institutional exception to compulsory immunization,not only bridge the gap between government compulsion and individual autonomy but also ensure the flexibility of the system.In China,laws similarly empower the government to establish vaccination plans.However,under the absolute compulsory immunization requirement,introducing the vaccination exemption may be an effective way to balance individual freedom and public interest.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.49