{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,13]],"date-time":"2026-07-13T12:09:28Z","timestamp":1783944568937,"version":"3.55.0"},"reference-count":16,"publisher":"Oxford University Press (OUP)","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,13]],"date-time":"2026-07-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1783900800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":109,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"name":"Netherlands Institute of Advanced Study"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,26]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>There are two main ways in which a mandatory vaccination policy is often defended\u2014by accusing vaccine refusers of \u2018free riding\u2019, or by appealing to the \u2018harm principle\u2019. In their recent book, Roland Pierik and Marcel Verweij take the latter approach\u2014an attractive option, as they note, due to the wide acceptance of the harm principle. But in arguing that vaccine refusal should indeed be thought to constitute harm, they end up endorsing a very controversial version of the harm principle, which we should not automatically expect to secure widespread support. Steven Smith suggests that this (common) argumentative strategy amounts to free riding on the reputation of the harm principle, and is an inevitable consequence of invoking the principle as the foundation of an argument. In its most basic form, the principle is hard to resist. But in order to use it to justify a policy, you need to make some assumptions about what constitutes harm, which will lose you supporters along the way. In appealing to the wide appeal of the harm principle, Pierik and Verweij do not adequately recognise the controversial nature of their claims, and thus the need for stronger and more elaborate arguments in their support.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1093\/phe\/phag012","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,1]],"date-time":"2026-05-01T12:28:41Z","timestamp":1777638521000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Free Riding on the Harm Principle"],"prefix":"10.1093","volume":"19","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-8292-3789","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Lucie","family":"White","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Utrecht University ,","place":["The Netherlands"]}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,13]]},"reference":[{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"792","DOI":"10.1136\/medethics-2016-103857","article-title":"The Case Against Libertarian Arguments for Compulsory Vaccination","volume":"43","author":"Bernstein","year":"2017","journal-title":"Journal of Medical Ethics"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"37","DOI":"10.1136\/medethics-2016-103486","article-title":"A Libertarian Case for Mandatory Vaccination","volume":"44","author":"Brennan","year":"2018","journal-title":"Journal of Medical Ethics"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"354","DOI":"10.18553\/jmcp.2021.20410","article-title":"Direct Medical Costs of Obesity in the United States and the Most Populous States","volume":"27","author":"Cawley","year":"2021","journal-title":"Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B4","author":"Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)","year":"2024"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"171","DOI":"10.1080\/13698230.2011.529707","article-title":"Climate Change, Collective Harm and Legitimate Coercion","volume":"14","author":"Cripps","year":"2011","journal-title":"Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"5","DOI":"10.1007\/s10730-013-9221-5","article-title":"A Defense of Compulsory Vaccination","volume":"26","author":"Flanigan","year":"2014","journal-title":"HEC Forum"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"446","DOI":"10.1111\/japp.12400","article-title":"An Argument for Compulsory Vaccination: The Taxation Analogy","volume":"37","author":"Giubilini","year":"2020","journal-title":"Journal of Applied Philosophy"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"46","DOI":"10.1186\/s12889-021-12449-2","article-title":"Burden of Disease Study of Overweight and Obesity; the Societal Impact in Terms of Cost-of-Illness and Health-Related Quality of Life","volume":"22","author":"Hecker","year":"2022","journal-title":"BMC Public Health"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"277","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-030-14504-0_27","volume-title":"Handbook of Eating and Drinking: Interdisciplinary Perspectives","author":"Higgs","year":"2020"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B10","author":"John","year":"2021"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B11","volume-title":"On Liberty, Utilitarianism and Other Works","author":"Mill","year":"2016"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B12","first-page":"184","volume-title":"Responsibility and Healthcare","author":"Nath","year":"2022"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.7551\/mitpress\/15307.001.0001","volume-title":"Inducing Immunity? Justifying Immunization Policies in Times of Vaccine Hesitancy","author":"Pierik","year":"2024"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"414","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jand.2013.11.009","article-title":"What Everyone Else is Eating: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Informational Eating Norms on Eating Behavior","volume":"114","author":"Robinson","year":"2014","journal-title":"Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B15","first-page":"1","article-title":"The Hollowness of the Harm Principle","volume":"17","author":"Smith","year":"2004","journal-title":"University of San Diego School of Law Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series"},{"key":"2026071220064181700_phag012-B16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s40592-024-00196-0","article-title":"Justification for Coercion in a Public Health Crisis: Not Just a Matter of Individual Harm","author":"White","year":"2024","journal-title":"Monash Bioethics Review"}],"container-title":["Public Health Ethics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/phe\/article-pdf\/19\/2\/phag012\/68758190\/phag012.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/phe\/article-pdf\/19\/2\/phag012\/68758190\/phag012.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,13]],"date-time":"2026-07-13T01:03:05Z","timestamp":1783904585000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/phe\/article\/doi\/10.1093\/phe\/phag012\/8732409"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,26]]},"references-count":16,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,26]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/phe\/phag012","relation":{},"ISSN":["1754-9973","1754-9981"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1754-9973","type":"print"},{"value":"1754-9981","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2026,7]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,26]]},"article-number":"phag012"}}