Mark Navin is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Oakland University (Rochester, MI). His research focuses on ethical issues in law and public policy. In addition to his work on vaccine refusal, he has published on topics including human rights, inequality, conscientious objection, international development assistance, social segregation, and food justice.
Navin confronts the public stalemate over state-mandated childhood vaccines by taking seriously the concerns expressed by parents who worry about the safety and efficacy of vaccines. In so doing, he identifies the root of many parents' concerns and exposes for us workable solutions that will help maintain high levels of public trust in vaccines. Mark A. Largent, Michigan State University, USA Parents who deny the safety or efficacy of vaccines and refuse to vaccinate their children are the targets of deeply emotional debate. In a rigorous and fair-minded way, Navin explains how vaccine denialism is symptomatic of deeper issues about the relationship between the educated public and health care. Navin explains sympathetically how otherwise apparently reasonable people may reason poorly when they feel disempowered by experts and support one another in increasingly isolated communities of knowledge. Navin's understanding of what motivates vaccine denialists and how they fall prey to overconfidence and cognitive biases should be highly illuminating for those on all sides of the current vaccine controversy. Leslie Francis, University of Utah, USA To sum things up, Navin's book offers valuable insight into the diverse and thought-provoking reasons for vaccine denialism. His portrait of vaccine denialism is a useful tool for public health officials and scholars who want to better understand denialist communities and vaccine refusal more generally. Jessica Flanigan, University of Richmond, The Journal of Value Inquiry This book is the result of a rigorous research effort resulting in extensive notes and bibliographies at the end of each chapter. Navin is a philosopher, and there is a philosophical orientation to the written material.This can make the text challenging to read at times, but it enhances the quality of the information provided. Summing Up: Recommended. R. L. Jones, Pennsylvania State University, College of Medicine, CHOICE