Public views about COVID-19 'Immunity Passports'. Issue 1 (8th July 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hall, Mark A; Studdert, David M
• Is Part Of: Journal of law and the biosciences. Volume 8:Issue 1(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-07-08
• Subjects: Life sciences -- Law and legislation -- Periodicals; Science and law -- Periodicals; Law and biology -- Periodicals; Biotechnology -- Law and legislation -- Periodicals; Bioethics -- Periodicals; 344.0957
• DOI: 10.1093/jlb/lsab016
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2053-9711

Abstract

Abstract: Importance: Discovery of effective vaccines and increased confidence that infection confers extended protection against coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have renewed discussion of using immunity certificates or 'passports' to selectively reduce ongoing public health restrictions. Objective: To determine public views regarding government and private conferral of immunity privileges. Design and Setting: National on-line survey fielded in June 2020. Participants were randomly asked about either government 'passports' or private 'certificates' for COVID-19 immunity. Participants: Adults from a standing panel maintained for academic research, selected to approximate national demographics. Main Outcomes/Measures: Level of support/opposition to immunity privileges, and whether views vary based on: government vs. private adoption; demographics; political affiliation or views; or various COVID19-related attitudes and experiences. Results: Of 1315 respondents, 45.2% supported immunity privileges, with slightly more favoring private certificates than government passports (48.1% vs 42.6%, p = 0.04). Support was greater for using passports or certificates to enable returns to high-risk jobs or attendance at large recreational events than for returning to work generally. Levels of support did not vary significantly according to age groups, socioeconomic or employment status, urbanicity, political affiliation or views, or whether the respondent had chronic disease(s). However, estimates from adjusted analyses showed less support among women (odds ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.80), and among Hispanics (0.56; 0.40 to 0.78) and other minorities (0.58; 0.40 to 0.85) compared with whites, but not among blacks (0.83; 0.60 to 1.15). Support was much higher among those who personally wanted a passport or certificate (75.6% vs 24.4%) and much lower among those who believed this would harm the social fabric of their community (22.9% vs 77.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Public views are divided on both government or private uses of immunity certificates, but, prior to any efforts to politicize the issues, these views did not vary along usual political lines or by characteristics that indicate individual vulnerability to infection. Social consensus on the desirability of an immunity privileges programs may be difficult to achieve.