Reciprocity as an Argument for Prioritizing Healthcare Workers for the COVID-19 Vaccine

Abstract

During the recent debates on whether to prioritize healthcare workers for COVID-19 vaccines, two lines of argument were prevalent, namely arguments centered on maximizing health, either with or without a special emphasis on the worse off, and arguments centered on reciprocity. In this article, we scrutinize the arguments of reciprocity. The notions of fittingness and proportionality are fundamental for the act of reciprocating, and we consider the importance of these notions for various arguments from reciprocity, showing that the arguments are problematic. If there is a plausible argument for reciprocity during the COVID-19 pandemic, this is most likely one that centers on the risk that healthcare workers take on as part of their jobs. Furthermore, we argue that the scope of this argument should not be extended only to healthcare workers, other essential workers at risk are in a position to make the same arguments. We also consider whether reciprocating with vaccines, rather than by other means, is necessary. Allocating vaccines based on reciprocity will arguably conflict with utility-maximizing, concerns for the worse off, and equity concerns. Given the weak state of the reciprocity arguments, we conclude that overriding these concerns seems unreasonable.

Reciprocity as an Argument for Prioritizing Healthcare Workers for the COVID-19 Vaccine