US state vaccine mandates did not influence COVID-19 vaccination rates but reduced uptake of COVID-19 boosters and flu vaccines compared to bans on vaccine restrictions.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, some US states mandated vaccination for certain citizens. We used state-level data from the CDC to test whether vaccine mandates predicted changes in COVID-19 vaccine uptake, as well as related voluntary behaviors involving COVID-19 boosters and seasonal influenza vaccines. Results showed that COVID-19 vaccine adoption did not significantly change in the weeks before and after states implemented vaccine mandates, suggesting that mandates did not directly impact COVID-19 vaccination. Compared to states that banned vaccine restrictions, however, states with mandates had lower levels of COVID-19 booster adoption as well as adult and child flu vaccination, especially when residents initially were less likely to vaccinate for COVID-19. This research supports the notion that governmental restrictions in the form of vaccination mandates can have unintended negative consequences, not necessarily by reducing uptake of the mandated vaccine, but by reducing adoption of other voluntary vaccines.

Driving Sustainability in the United States: Efficacy of State-Level Biodiesel Policy Approaches.

The United States has significant greenhouse gas and criteria pollutant emissions that lead to global warming, human health, ozone, and smog issues, partially attributed to its diesel-consuming transport fleet. Until fleet electrification reaches cost parity with internal combustion engines, biodiesel use can reduce these negative impacts. In this study, we analyzed and categorized the biodiesel-supporting policies of each U.S. state using manual inductive coding to compare them against state-level biodiesel consumption and production. Through statistical modeling, we determined the efficacy of these policy approaches. The policy analysis identified that biodiesel policies that support infrastructure development and biodiesel production correlate significantly with increased biodiesel consumption at the state level. We also show that a combination of these policy categories correlates significantly with overall higher biodiesel consumption. Our methodological approach and policy analysis findings reveal valuable insight into the efficacy and outcomes from existing biofuel policies in the United States.

Parents' attitudes towards the No Jab No Play legislation in Western Australia: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Mandates provide a relatively cost-effective strategy to increase vaccinate rates. Since 2014, five Australian states have implemented No Jab No Play (NJPlay) policies that require children to be fully immunised to attend early childhood education and childcare services. In Western Australia, where this study was conducted, NJNPlay legislation was enacted in 2019. While most Australian families support vaccine mandates, there are a range of complexities and unintended consequences for some families. This research explores the impact on families of the NJNPlay legislation in Western Australia (WA). METHODS: This mixed-methods study used an online parent/carer survey (n = 261) representing 427 children and in-depth interviews (n = 18) to investigate: (1) the influence of the NJNPlay legislation on decision to vaccinate; and (2) the financial and emotional impacts of NJNPlay legislation. Descriptive and bivariate tests were used to analyse the survey data and open-ended questions and interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis to capture the experience and the reality of participants. RESULTS: Approximately 60% of parents intended to vaccinate their child. Parents who had decided not to vaccinate their child/ren were significantly more likely to experience financial [p < 0.001] and emotional impacts [p < 0.001], compared to those who chose to vaccinate because of the mandate. Qualitative data were divided with around half of participants supporting childhood immunisation and NJNPlay with others discussing concerns. The themes (a) belief in the importance of vaccination and ease of access, (b) individual and community protection, and (c) vaccine effectiveness, safety and alternatives help understand how parents' beliefs and access may influence vaccination uptake. Unintended impacts of NJNPlay included: (a) lack of choice, pressure and coercion to vaccinate; (b) policy and community level stigma and discrimination; (c) financial and career impacts; and (d) loss of education opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: Parents appreciation of funded immunisation programs and mandates which enhance individual and community protection was evident. However for others unintended consequences of the mandate resulted in significant social, emotional, financial and educational impacts. Long-term evidence highlights the positive impact of immunisation programs. Opinions of impacted families should be considered to alleviate mental health stressors.

Challenging Pandemic Law: From Vaccine Mandates to Judicial Review of Vaccine Approvals.

Over recent years, dozens of legal challenges have been instituted in response to government action during the COVID-19 pandemic. While public health orders have been challenged on several grounds, few cases have succeeded. Fewer cases still have called into question decisions made by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) to approve the COVID-19 vaccines. This section provides a brief update on one recent, partially successful COVID-19 health directions case before examining two applications in the Federal Court of Australia seeking judicial review of the TGA's approval of the COVID-19 vaccines. The section argues that, while both TGA applications were dismissed for lack of standing, they illustrate how and why third parties will ordinarily not be entitled to challenge administrative decisions about therapeutic goods.

Airborne SARS-CoV-2 is more frequently detected in environments related to children and elderly but likely non-infectious, Norway, 2022.

This study investigates the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in indoor and outdoor environments in two cities in Norway between April and May 2022. With the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions in the country and a focus on vaccination, this research aims to shed light on the potential for virus transmission in various settings. Air sampling was conducted in healthcare and non-healthcare facilities, covering locations frequented by individuals across different age groups. The study found that out of 31 air samples, only four showed the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-qPCR, with no viable virus detected after RNAse pre-treatment. These positive samples were primarily associated with environments involving children and the elderly. Notably, sequencing revealed mutations associated with increased infectivity in one of the samples. The results highlight the importance of considering children as potential sources of virus transmission, especially in settings with prolonged indoor exposure. As vaccination coverage increases globally, and with children still representing a substantial unvaccinated population, the study emphasizes the need to re-implement mask-wearing mandates indoors and in public transport to reduce virus transmission. The findings have implications for public health strategies to control COVID-19, particularly in the face of new variants and the potential for increased transmission during the autumn and winter seasons.

State insurance mandates for in vitro fertilization are not associated with improving racial and ethnic disparities in utilization and treatment outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in utilization and clinical outcomes following fertility care with in vitro fertilization in the United States are well-documented. Given the cost of fertility care, lack of insurance is a barrier to access across all races and ethnicities. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine how state insurance mandates are associated with racial and ethnic disparities in in vitro fertilization utilization and clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cohort study using data from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinical Outcome Reporting System from 2014 to 2019 for autologous in vitro fertilization cycles. The primary outcomes were utilization-defined as the number of in vitro fertilization cycles per 10,000 reproductive-aged women-and cumulative live birth-defined as the delivery of at least 1 liveborn neonate resulting from a single stimulation cycle and its corresponding fresh or thawed transfers. RESULTS: Most (72.9%) of the 1,096,539 cycles from 487,191 women occurred in states without an insurance mandate. Although utilization was higher across all racial and ethnic groups in mandated states, the increase in utilization was greatest for non-Hispanic Asian and non-Hispanic White women. For instance, in the most recent study year (2019), the utilization rates for non-Hispanic White women compared with non-Hispanic Black/African American women were 23.5 cycles per 10,000 women higher in nonmandated states and 56.2 cycles per 10,000 women higher in mandated states. There was no significant interaction between race and ethnicity and insurance mandate status on any of the clinical outcomes (all P-values for interaction terms > .05). CONCLUSION: Racial and ethnic disparities in utilization of in vitro fertilization and clinical outcomes for autologous cycles persist regardless of state health insurance mandates.

Association of state insurance coverage mandates with assisted reproductive technology care discontinuation.

BACKGROUND: Insurance coverage for fertility services may reduce the financial burden of high-cost fertility care such as assisted reproductive technology and improve its utilization. Patients who exit care after failing to reach their reproductive goals report higher rates of mental health problems and a lower sense of well-being. It is important to understand the relationship between state-mandated insurance coverage for fertility services and assisted reproductive technology care discontinuation. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether state-mandated insurance coverage for fertility services is associated with lower rates of care discontinuation after an initial assisted reproductive technology cycle that did not result in a live birth. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective, population-based cohort study using data from United States fertility clinics reporting to the National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System during 2016 and 2018. Patients who began their first autologous assisted reproductive technology cycle during 2016 and 2017 and did not have a live birth were included. We describe the rate of assisted reproductive technology care discontinuation (no additional cycle within 12 months of the previous cycle's date of failure). Multivariable analyses were conducted to evaluate factors independently associated with care discontinuation, including the scope of fertility services included in state coverage mandate at assisted reproductive technology cycle initiation that were as follows: comprehensive (≥3 assisted reproductive technology cycles), limited (1, 2, or an unspecified number of assisted reproductive technology cycles), mandate not including assisted reproductive technology, and no mandate. RESULTS: Among 91,324 patients who underwent their first autologous assisted reproductive technology cycle that did not result in live birth, 24,072 (26.4%) discontinued care. Compared with patients who lived in states with mandates for comprehensive assisted reproductive technology coverage, those in states with mandates for fertility services coverage that did not include assisted reproductive technology or states with no mandate were 46% (adjusted relative risk, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.63) and 26% (adjusted relative risk, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.39) more likely to discontinue care, respectively, after controlling for patient and cycle characteristics. Increasing patient age, distance from clinic ≥50 miles, previous live birth, fewer oocytes retrieved, and not having embryos cryopreserved were also associated with higher rates of discontinuation. Non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian, and Hispanic patients had higher rates of care discontinuation than non-Hispanic White patients regardless of the existence or scope of state-mandated assisted reproductive technology coverage. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive state-mandated insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technology is associated with lower rates of assisted reproductive technology care discontinuation.

Exploring the ethical complexity of pediatric organ transplant candidates and COVID-19 vaccination: Tensions between autonomy and beneficence, children and parents.

BACKGROUND: POT is emotionally sensitive due to cohort vulnerability, their lack of decisional capacity, and waitlist mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic has added complexity to the setting of pediatric transplantation, as well as living donation, due to tensions about COVID-19 vaccination for recipients, donors, and parent-caregivers. METHODS: In the context of COVID-19 vaccination, two ethicists present four pediatric donation and transplant dilemmas for ethical exploration and offer guidance to clinical teams, noting that mandates are controversial, and there is no global harmonization regarding requirements. RESULTS: As with all vaccinations, they are a tool of organ stewardship aimed to optimize outcomes and, in the setting of pediatrics, ensure optimal caregiving for these vulnerable recipients. Current evidence supports the ethical permissibility of COVID-19 vaccination mandates for transplant candidates aged 6 months and older. CONCLUSION: Our guidance considers the tensions of autonomy and beneficence and the ethical duty of organ stewardship. The harms of being unvaccinated and risking the harms of COVID-19 and long-COVID post-transplant support the ethical permissibility of vaccination mandates in countries where the vaccine has pediatric regulatory approval.

Correlates of COVID-19 vaccination intentions and opinions about mandates among four groups of adults in South Africa with distinct vaccine intentions: evidence from a large national survey.

INTRODUCTION: Despite a high number of recorded COVID-19 infections and deaths in South Africa, COVID-19 vaccine coverage remained low in March 2022, ten months into the national vaccine roll-out. This study provides evidence on the correlates of vaccine intentions, attitudes towards vaccination and opinions about mandates. METHODS: We used data from the second COVID-19 Vaccine Survey (CVACS), a telephone survey conducted February-March 2022 among 3,608 South African adults who self-reported not being vaccinated against COVID-19. The survey instrument was designed in consultation with government, policymakers, and civil society; and segmented the sample into four distinct groups with different vaccine intentions (synonymous with vaccine hesitancy levels). Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used to examine the sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes and behaviours associated with the different vaccination intentions groups. Thematic coding of responses to open-ended questions elicited insights on reasons for not being vaccinated and attitudes towards mandates. RESULTS: Intentions to get vaccinated were greater among individuals with lower socio-economic status (Mann-Whitney Z = -11.3, p < 0.001); those believing the vaccine protects against death (Kruskal-Wallis Χ2 = 494, p < 0.001); and those who perceived themselves at risk of COVID-19-related illness (Χ2 = 126, p < 0.01). Vaccine intentions were lower among individuals who believed that the vaccine causes death (Χ2 = 163, p < 0.001); believed that the vaccine is unsafe for the babies of pregnant/breastfeeding mothers, or the chronically ill (Χ2 = 123, p < 0.01); those not trusting government health information about COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccine (Kendall's τ = -0.41, p < 0.01); and those in opposition to mandates (τ = 0.35, p < 0.001). Only 25% supported mandates, despite 48% thinking mandates would work well, with 54% citing individual rights as their main reason for mandate opposition. CONCLUSION: The profile of individuals not vaccinated against COVID-19 as of March 2022 varied markedly by self-reported vaccination intentions, underscoring the importance of tailored demand-creation efforts. This paper highlights several factors which differ significantly across these groups. These findings could inform the design of future vaccination campaigns, potentially increasing their likelihood of success. This is an important policy objective given widespread vaccine hesitancy, and further work is required on this topic. Mandates remain an option to increase coverage but need to be carefully considered given extensive opposition.

Trust in healthcare before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Public trust is often advantageous for health authorities during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Norwegian health authorities used the public´s high trust to control the pandemic, resulting in relatively few casualties. METHODS: We wanted to describe and compare the Norwegian public trust in GPs, public healthcare, information and treatment in hospitals before and during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, we wanted to investigate the relationship between somatic or mental illness, and trust in GPs and public health information, and to develop a theoretical understanding of the relationship between trust in healthcare institutions, generalised trust and the societal situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. We performed two surveys, the first in December 2019; the second in May 2020, thus providing two snapshots of the Norwegian public's trust in healthcare and healthcare actors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: There was statistically significant increased trust in public healthcare, in treatment at hospital and in information at hospital after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. There was a non-significant rise in trust in GPs. We found that trust in public health information was not related to mental health nor having a chronic, somatic disease. CONCLUSION: The findings confirm that the Norwegian public's trust in healthcare and healthcare actors is high. The trust levels are also relatively stable, and even show an increase during the early phases of the pandemic. We suggest that there is a dynamic relationship between trust in public health information, healthcare institutions, generalised trust and a societal crisis situation such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the GP-patient trust seems less affected by a crisis situation, than the public´s trust in healthcare institutions. This difference may be explained by the relative stability caused by mandates of trust obtained from the patient.

High rates of observed face mask use at Colorado universities align with students' opinions about masking and support the safety and viability of in-person higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, colleges and universities have focused on creating policies, such as mask mandates, to minimize COVID-19 transmission both on their campuses and in the surrounding community. Adherence to and opinions about these policies remain largely unknown. METHODS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed a cross-sectional study, the Mask Adherence and Surveillance at Colleges and Universities Project (MASCUP!), to objectively and inconspicuously measure rates of mask use at institutes of higher education via direct observation. From February 15 through April 11, 2021 the University of Colorado Boulder (CU, n = 2,808 observations) and Colorado State University Fort Collins (CSU, n = 3,225 observations) participated in MASCUP! along with 52 other institutes of higher education (n = 100,353 observations) spanning 21 states and the District of Columbia. Mask use was mandatory at both Colorado universities and student surveys were administered to assess student beliefs and attitudes. RESULTS: We found that 91.7%, 93.4%, and 90.8% of persons observed at indoor locations on campus wore a mask correctly at University of Colorado, Colorado State University, and across the 52 other schools, respectively. Student responses to questions about masking were in line with these observed rates of mask use where 92.9% of respondents at CU and 89.8% at CSU believe that wearing masks can protect the health of others. Both Colorado universities saw their largest surges in COVID-19 cases in the fall of 2020, with markedly lower case counts during the mask observation window in the spring of 2021. CONCLUSION: High levels of mask use at Colorado's two largest campuses aligned with rates observed at other institutes across the country. These high rates of use, coupled with positive student attitudes about mask use, demonstrate that masks were widely accepted and may have contributed to reduced COVID-19 case counts. This study supports an emerging body of literature substantiating masks as an effective, low-cost measure to reduce disease transmission and establishes masking (with proper education and promotion) as a viable tactic to reduce respiratory disease transmission on college campuses.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake and attitudes towards mandates in a nationally representative U.S. sample.

Widespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccination is vital to curtailing the pandemic, yet rates remain suboptimal in the U.S. Vaccine mandates have previously been successful, but are controversial. An April 2021 survey of a nationally representative sample (N = 1208) examined vaccine uptake, attitudes, and sociodemographic characteristics. Sixty-seven percent were vaccine acceptors, 14% wait-and-see, and 19% non-acceptors. Compared to wait-and-see and non-acceptors, acceptors were more likely to have a household member over age 65, have received a flu shot, have positive COVID-19 vaccine attitudes, and view COVID-19 vaccination as beneficial. Mandate support was higher among respondents who were vaccine acceptors, had positive views about COVID-19 vaccines, believed in COVID-19 preventive strategies, perceived COVID-19 as severe, were liberal, resided in the Northeast, were non-White, and had incomes < $75,000. Public health campaigns should target attitudes that appear to drive hesitancy and prepare for varying mandate support based on demographics, COVID-19 vaccine attitudes, and the scope of the mandate.

The ethics of COVID-19 vaccine mandates for healthcare workers: Public health and clinical perspectives.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers (HCWs) remains of significant public health concern due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, many healthcare institutions are considering or have implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs. We assess defenses of COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs from both public health and professional ethics perspectives. We consider public health values, professional obligations of HCWs, and the institutional failures in healthcare throughout the COVID-19 pandemic which have impacted the lived experiences of HCWs. We argue that, despite the compelling urgency of maximizing COVID-19 vaccine uptake among HCWs, the ethical case for COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs in the United States is complex, and, under current circumstances, inconclusive. Nevertheless, we recognize that COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs have already been and will continue to be implemented across many healthcare institutions. Given such context, we provide suggestions for implementing COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs.

Religious pluralism and the ethics of healthcare.

Democratic societies that separate church and state face major challenges in accommodating religious convictions. This applies especially to determining healthcare policies. Building on our prior work on the demands and limits of religious accommodation in democratic societies, we propose a set of ethical standards that can guide societies in meeting this challenge. In applying and defending these standards, we explore three topics: vaccine resistance, abortion, and concerns about rights to healthcare. We clarify these and other issues of religious accommodation and propose ethical standards for approaching these and other problems.

Making salient ethics arguments about vaccine mandates: A California case study.

Vaccine mandates can take many forms, and different kinds of mandates can implicate an array of values in diverse ways. It follows that good ethics arguments about particular vaccine mandates will attend to the details of individual policies. Furthermore, attention to particular mandate policies-and to attributes of the communities they aim to govern-can also illuminate which ethics arguments may be more salient in particular contexts. If ethicists want their arguments to make a difference in policy, they should attend to these kinds of empirical considerations. This paper focuses on the most common and contentious vaccine mandate reform in the contemporary United States: the elimination of nonmedical exemptions (NMEs) to school and daycare vaccine mandates. It highlights, in particular, debates about California's Senate Bill 277 (SB277), which was the first successful recent effort to eliminate NMEs in that country. We use media, secondary sources, and original interviews with policymakers and activists to identify and evaluate three ethics arguments offered by critics of SB277: parental freedom, informed consent, and children's rights to care and education. We then turn to one ethics argument often offered by advocates of SB277: harm prevention. We note, however, that three arguments for mandates that are common in the immunization ethics literature-fairness/free-riding, children's rights to vaccination, and utilitarianism-did not play a role in debates about SB277.

Evaluating the Impact of Mask Mandates and Political Party Affiliation on Mental Health Internet Search Behavior in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Generalized Additive Mixed Model Framework.

BACKGROUND: The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health worldwide and in the United States have been well documented. However, there is limited research examining the long-term effects of the pandemic on mental health, particularly in relation to pervasive policies such as statewide mask mandates and political party affiliation. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to examine whether statewide mask mandates and political party affiliations yielded differential changes in mental health symptoms across the United States by leveraging state-specific internet search query data. METHODS: This study leveraged Google search queries from March 24, 2020, to March 29, 2021, in each of the 50 states in the United States. Of the 50 states, 39 implemented statewide mask mandates-with 16 of these states being Republican-to combat the spread of COVID-19. This study investigated whether mask mandates were associated differentially with mental health in states with and without mandates by exploring variations in mental health search queries across the United States. In addition, political party affiliation was examined as a potential covariate to determine whether mask mandates had differential associations with mental health in Republican and Democratic states. Generalized additive mixed models were implemented to model associations among mask mandates, political party affiliation, and mental health search volume for up to 7 months following the implementation of a mask mandate. RESULTS: The results of generalized additive mixed models revealed that search volume for "restless" significantly increased following a mask mandate across all states, whereas the search volume for "irritable" and "anxiety" increased and decreased, respectively, following a mandate for Republican states in comparison with Democratic states. Most mental health search terms did not exhibit significant changes in search volume in relation to mask mandate implementation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that mask mandates were associated nonlinearly with significant changes in mental health search behavior, with the most notable associations occurring in anxiety-related search terms. Therefore, policy makers should consider monitoring and providing additional support for these mental health symptoms following the implementation of public health-related mandates such as mask mandates. Nevertheless, these results do not provide evidence for an overwhelming impact of mask mandates on population-level mental health in the United States.

Effects of non-compulsory and mandatory COVID-19 interventions on travel distance and time away from home, Norway, 2021.

BackgroundGiven the societal, economic and health costs of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI), it is important to assess their effects. Human mobility serves as a surrogate measure for human contacts and compliance with NPI. In Nordic countries, NPI have mostly been advised and sometimes made mandatory. It is unclear if making NPI mandatory further reduced mobility.AimWe investigated the effect of non-compulsory and follow-up mandatory measures in major cities and rural regions on human mobility in Norway. We identified NPI categories that most affected mobility.MethodsWe used mobile phone mobility data from the largest Norwegian operator. We analysed non-compulsory and mandatory measures with before-after and synthetic difference-in-differences approaches. By regression, we investigated the impact of different NPI on mobility.ResultsNationally and in less populated regions, time travelled, but not distance, decreased after follow-up mandatory measures. In urban areas, however, distance decreased after follow-up mandates, and the reduction exceeded the decrease after initial non-compulsory measures. Stricter metre rules, gyms reopening, and restaurants and shops reopening were significantly associated with changes in mobility.ConclusionOverall, distance travelled from home decreased after non-compulsory measures, and in urban areas, distance further decreased after follow-up mandates. Time travelled reduced more after mandates than after non-compulsory measures for all regions and interventions. Stricter distancing and reopening of gyms, restaurants and shops were associated with changes in mobility.

Impact of in vitro fertilization state mandates for third party insurance coverage in the United States: a review and critical assessment.

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine estimates that fewer than a quarter of infertile couples have sufficient access to infertility care. Insurers in the United States (US) have long considered infertility to be a socially constructed condition, and thus in-vitro fertilization (IVF) an elective intervention. As a result, IVF is cost prohibitive for many patients in the US. State infertility insurance mandates are a crucial mechanism for expanding access to fertility care in the US in the absence of federal legislation. The first state insurance mandate for third party coverage of infertility services was passed by West Virginia in 1977, and Maryland passed the country's first IVF mandate in 1985. To date, twenty states have passed legislation requiring insurers to cover or offer coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of infertility. Ten states currently have "comprehensive" IVF mandates, meaning they require third party coverage for IVF with minimal restrictions to patient eligibility, exemptions, and lifetime limits. Several studies analyzing the impact of infertility and IVF mandates have been published in the past 20 years. In this review, we characterize and contextualize the existing evidence of the impact of state insurance mandates on access to infertility treatment, IVF practice patterns, and reproductive outcomes. Furthermore, we summarize the arguments in favor of insurance coverage for infertility care and assess the limitations of state insurance mandates as a strategy for increasing access to infertility treatment. State mandates play a key role in the promotion of evidence-based practices and represent an essential and impactful strategy for the advancement of gender equality and reproductive rights.

The case against COVID-19 vaccine mandates in pediatric solid organ transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The American Society of Transplantation in conjunction with the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation released a joint statement on August 13, 2021 in which they strongly recommend that solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients and their eligible household members and close contacts be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 with an approved COVID-19 vaccine. Some SOT programs have gone further and will refuse to list or transplant candidates unless the candidate and their household are vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Two general pediatrician-ethicists use current best evidence and moral theory to argue why it is unethical to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for pediatric SOT candidates, their primary support person, and their households. RESULTS: Pediatric vaccine mandates are most justifiable when they prevent the harm of a serious vaccine preventable disease (VPD) in children in settings where transmission is highly likely and there are no alternatives that are effective in preventing transmission that intrude less on individual freedom. An additional justification for a vaccine mandate in the SOT context is stewardship of a scarce resource if there is significant risk of graft loss from the VPD to an unvaccinated SOT candidate or recipient. Current evidence does not support fulfillment of these criteria in pediatric solid organ transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Making SOT listing contingent on COVID-19 vaccination is problematic. Though there is some risk of harm to a pediatric SOT candidate in remaining unvaccinated, the risk of harm of not being listed and transplanted is greater and overriding.

Imperfect Immunization Communication on School District Websites: A Mixed-Methods Review.

Schools and school districts are key to U.S. vaccination policies: They communicate immunization enrollment requirements and enforce them during registration. This article presents a mixed-methods study of how Michigan's 537 districts communicate about vaccine mandates through public-facing websites. It reports the results of a qualitative analysis (n = 50) of websites from Southeast Michigan and a quantitative analysis of all (n = 537) Michigan's district websites. School district websites engage in diverse health promotion practices surrounding immunization, from encouraging vaccination to neutral messaging and to encouraging exemptions. Most provide scant immunization information and few promote the importance of immunization for individual and community health. We recommend that school nurses, district staff, and health authorities collaborate to ensure that school district communication promotes immunization and does not promote nonmedical exemptions. This can lead schools to embrace immunization as an essential activity for their own functioning rather than as an unwelcome requirement imposed by outside agents.