Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

They who hesitate are lost – the psychology of vaccine hesitancy and refusal

08 October 2021 | Story Angie Vorster | Photo Supplied

AngieVorster copy — Angie Vorster is a Clinical Psychologist in the School of Clinical Medicine, University of the Free State (UFS), and believes that the only way to get rid of COVID-19, or at least to continue our lives alongside it, is for all of us to be vaccinated against this deadly virus

Opinion article by Angie Vorster, Clinical Psychologist in the School of Clinical Medicine, University of the Free State.

The World Mental Health Day campaign has chosen ‘Mental Health in an Unequal World’ as the theme for 2021. This is partly to raise awareness of the distinct polarisation between countries and individuals that has been highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic over the past two years. Access to health-care resources is significantly impinging the ability of countries across the world to address the effects of the pandemic, and stark inequality regarding pivotal elements such as access to vaccines has become visible. Obtaining, storing, and distributing vaccines has proven to add another burden to countries that are already financially and resource-impeded. Yet, once South Africa was lucky enough to secure adequate amounts of vaccines, we were faced with a baffling dilemma. How to get our residents to actually take it? In trying to understand the psychology behind vaccine hesitancy, it is interesting to note that the World Health Organisation listed vaccine hesitancy (delaying or refusing vaccination) as one of the top ten threats to global health – well before the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus.

Understanding why people refuse or resist vaccination

To understand why people – who are otherwise reasonable, conscientious, and informed individuals – would refuse or resist vaccination, it is helpful to look at the 5C model. The first aspect is confidence – the extent to which the person trusts that the vaccine is safe and will in fact do what it is said to do. Confidence is also affected by the level of trust that the individual has in the system that dispatches the vaccine – consequently, individuals who are hesitant to vaccinate are likely to be suspicious of authority figures and structures. Another factor is the number of constraints that individuals face in accessing the vaccine. If there are many barriers (e.g., unable to afford transport to the vaccination site, unable to take time off work, etc.) in terms of the calculation of costs versus benefits, obviously it would be easier to delay or refuse vaccination. Interestingly, perceived scarcity makes items/events more desirable. Perhaps it is the very fact that the vaccine is free and available that makes people not interested in receiving it.

Having a sense of collective responsibility and altruism are important characteristics in those who submit to vaccination. People who refuse vaccination tend to be more individualistically orientated and less motivated by the greater good of all, than by their own personal preferences. And this brings us to the final C, which is complacency. People who perceive the risk of COVID-19 as low tend to feel less urgency to vaccinate. Unfortunately, these are the patients who admit to COVID ward front-line workers that they now regret not getting vaccinated when they had the chance; instead, they frequently come to this realisation once their prognosis is terminal and they are facing the harrowing reality of dying, separated from their loved ones.

And then we all know someone who believes in an ‘alternative’ explanation for the COVID-19 virus and its vaccine. There are many hypotheses as to why people prefer conspiracy theories over scientific truth – some of which include the fact that the science behind understanding viruses and their prevention is quite abstract and too complicated for lay people to understand. Unless they witness the devastating impact of the virus first-hand – it may be difficult to comprehend that an invisible entity can do so much damage. Another explanation is that the truth of a natural disaster such as a pandemic, which can occur at any time, randomly, and without warning, catching humanity off guard, is just too frightening to accept. So, it makes us feel safer to believe that humans ARE in fact in control and actually created COVID-19 for some larger sinister goal. Otherwise, we are left to contemplate how utterly vulnerable we all really are. Instead, we deny reality and substitute it with something that makes us feel a bit better.

How to encourage all citizens to get vaccinated

So, how do we encourage all citizens to get vaccinated in order for our society to regain some pre-pandemic normality? Force, anger, and frustration (which are undoubtedly justified, particularly by those who work on the front line, and by those who have lost loved ones due to this virus) are not going to get us there. Instead, we need religious and other leaders to set the example and publicly advocate for vaccination. We need to tailor the information to the vast majority of South Africans who are not science-literate, making it accessible and understandable in their home language. Unfortunately, there is a significant percentage who will not be swayed by these actions, and for these fellow South Africans I have the following message:

It does not matter anymore whether or not COVID-19 is in fact the product of a global conspiracy and whether or not the companies that create vaccines do so only for financial gain. It does not matter that this all happened very fast and that we all realised how terribly weak and vulnerable the human body is. What does matter is that this virus is here. In our homes, our schools, cities, and country. And the only way to get rid of it, or at least to continue our lives alongside it, is for all of us to be vaccinated. We have science – facts, not opinions or feelings or theories or beliefs – to tell us that vaccines are safe and effective. In ten years from now, this will be the plague of 2020. I hope that you will be able to say that you were brave, even though you were scared, even though you were unsure, even though you might have been fine without the vaccine, but that you were strong enough and kind enough and human enough to do this small thing for the greater good of humanity. And our children will thank you for restoring connection and hugs, concerts, and playtime at school without distancing and sanitiser and masks. You will have done something important. For your community and your country and in fact, the world. This is your chance to be part of a great victory of humanity over a seemingly insurmountable tide of death and suffering. Our hope lies in you. Take this great responsibility, wear it with pride and importance, and meet us at the other side of COVID-19.

News Archive

UFS responds on the outcome of the court case in the alleged attack by Cobus Muller and Charl Blom on Gwebu

2014-09-09

The management of the University of the Free State (UFS) acknowledges the finding issued on 4 September 2014 by the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) that it was “unable to find any corroborating evidence to make a conclusive finding of racism and violation of human rights” in the Muzi Gwebu case.

The university management also takes cognisance of the ruling in the Bloemfontein Regional Court by Regional Magistrate Rasheed Matthews today (9 September 2014) that both Cobus Muller and Charl Blom are found not guilty on all the charges which included reckless driving, crimen injuria, attempted murder and assault (Muller), and a charge of assault (Blom). We note the Magistrate’s concerns about “inconsistencies in the evidence and exaggerations”, that the complainant “displayed hostility throughout the trial” and that he was “not a reliable witness and is prejudiced.” And therefore, in the words of the Magistrate to the defendants, “I’ve decided to give you the benefit of the doubt.”

Both Muller and Blom were suspended from all campuses of the UFS on 19 February 2014 based on the evidence available at the time of reckless driving, assault and other charges. This evidence was further borne out by an internal investigation into the incident of 17 February 2014 on the Bloemfontein Campus. In the light of the evidence available to us at the time, and the volatile situation on campus in the days following the attack, the UFS management believes that it was the correct decision to suspend the students, given the serious nature of the charges, and pending a decision of the courts.

In the light of both the SAHRC ruling as the Regional Court ruling, the university management has decided to take the following steps:

1.   The suspensions of both Muller and Blom from all campuses of the university are lifted with immediate effect.

2.   Muller may attend a forthcoming graduation ceremony during which the degree BSc Construction Management will be officially conferred upon him. He completed all the requirements for the degree in 2013, but was not allowed to attend the graduation ceremony of 11 April 2014 due to his suspension and the fact that the criminal charges were still pending.

3.   Blom may return to the university to complete his studies.

4.   The UFS is in discussion with the parents of one of the students and, if required, would also meet with legal counsel of the university, as well as those of students Muller and Blom to discuss any further steps given the outcome of the court case.

5.   In short, on grounds of the ruling by die SAHRC, as well as the Bloemfontein Regional Court, the university will not continue with its disciplinary action against Muller and Blom.

Prof Jonathan Jansen, Vice-Chancellor and Rector of the UFS said: “This has been a very difficult time for the university and I am pleased to record that throughout the crisis, the student body on the Bloemfontein Campus showed remarkable restraint and discipline, confirming also the broad, non-racial character of the peaceful protests that followed. Our student body has matured and our campus cultures are much more inclusive and transformed as a result of the quality and depth of student leadership over the past few years. The new Student Representative Council (SRC) is a splendid example of this – with the first black woman President (Mosa Leteane) and the first blind woman SRC student leader (Louzanne Coetzee).”

“I am pleased that the matter is now behind us and, again, we rest with the decisions of the Commission and the Courts as final,” he said.

Prof Jansen also apologised on behalf of the UFS to Cobus Muller and Charl Blom, their parents, and their families, for the disruption that the suspension brought in their lives and for the stress they had to bear during this difficult period. “For that, I am truly sorry,” he said.

Issued by: Lacea Loader (Director: Communication and Brand Management)
Tel: +27 (0) 51 401 2584 | +27 (0) 83 645 2454
E-mail: news@ufs.ac.za

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept