The Social Basis of Vaccine Questioning and Refusal: A Qualitative Study Employing Bourdieu's Concepts of 'Capitals' and 'Habitus'

Parental perceptions of chickenpox and the varicella vaccine: A qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

In countries where varicella vaccination is not on the routine childhood immunisation schedule, such as those in the United Kingdom (UK), chickenpox is an almost universal disease of childhood. Chickenpox can cause serious complications, particularly in infants, pregnant women, and the immunocompromised. In November 2023 the varicella vaccine was recommended for inclusion in the UK routine childhood immunisation schedule. Successful rollout of the vaccine may be hindered by parental concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy, and perceptions of chickenpox as a mild illness.

OBJECTIVE

To examine parental perceptions of chickenpox and varicella vaccination, which may be crucial to effective vaccination campaigns.

DESIGN

Qualitative systematic review and thematic analysis.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were systematically searched for studies published between 2016 and 2023: CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, PubMed, and Web of Science. The included studies were appraised against the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist for qualitative studies. Thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data, through the development of themes.

RESULTS

22 articles were included in this review, and five themes identified: perceptions that chickenpox is a mild illness, that parents have concerns about varicella vaccine efficacy and safety, a notion of natural immunity as superior, social determinants of health influence vaccine decision making, and vaccination is overwhelming perceived as a parental decision.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst some parents displayed an acceptance and willingness to vaccinate against chickenpox, many expressed concerns, and perceived chickenpox as a routine unworrying childhood illness. Analysis demonstrated a knowledge gap in understanding UK parental opinions regarding chickenpox and varicella vaccination, highlighting the need for research in this area, particularly given ongoing reconsideration for inclusion in the UK vaccination schedule.

REGISTRATION

The review was registered on PROSPERO, registration ID CRD42021236120.

Pushed to the Fringe - The Impact of Vaccine Hesitancy on Children and Families

Vaccine hesitancy has been described as any delay or refusal of vaccines despite their availability and is increasing in Australia and other middle to high-income countries. The aim of this study is to gain a deep understanding of the experiences and influences on vaccine hesitant children and their families. A qualitative interview approach was undertaken with vaccine hesitant parents and pregnant women (n = 12). Semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone. Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken on data obtained using the guidelines of Braun and Clarke. Three main themes were identified in this study, including Pushed to the fringe; A culture of Distrust; and Coerced choices. The study revealed that vaccine hesitant parents felt isolated and pushed to the fringe of society. They also expressed dissatisfaction with the Australian "No Jab - No Pay" and "No Jab - No Play" legislation. This contributed to feelings of marginalization. Participants also cited a breakdown in the therapeutic relationships, which impacted their child's health. Additionally, a lack of sufficient information was received to achieve informed consent. These results suggest that there is a need for enhanced education for some health-care professionals, many of whom have reported being confronted by conversations with vaccine hesitant parents.

Psychological and Social Aspects of Vaccination Hesitancy-Implications for Travel Medicine in the Aftermath of the COVID-19 Crisis: A Narrative Review

Vaccines are an important tool of preventive medicine. Although organized vaccination programs have saved large populations from serious infectious diseases, there is a considerable part of the population who oppose vaccinations. In particular, anti-vaccination perceptions, among travelers to countries with endemic diseases, are a major public health concern. Although hesitancy towards vaccinations is not a novel phenomenon, it came back to the forefront during the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. This review explores the etiology of anti-vaccination beliefs among travelers and draws conclusions about their impact on public health and society in general. For this purpose, a purposeful search for data on the causative factors of vaccine hesitancy and their impact on people's health was conducted. A descriptive analysis of the findings and conclusions regarding possible implications in health policy and clinical practice are presented. A fear of side effects, lack of credence in the necessity of vaccines, and mistrust of medical authorities are important causative factors. Their interplay shapes hesitancy towards vaccines. However, anti-vaccination beliefs can also be an aspect of a more general unconventional stance of life. Health care professionals and organizations must be ready to tackle vaccine hesitancy by making the necessary interventions. Correcting misconceptions about vaccinations is a prerequisite for ensuring personal and public health, especially in the context of a pandemic or epidemic. Moreover, ensuring the efficacy and safety of vaccines, especially in cases of modern technology applications, is a fundamental factor in addressing people's concerns about vaccines. For this purpose, medical authorities and organizations must provide accurate and clear information on vaccines so as to eliminate misinformation. Furthermore, clinicians should cultivate their communication skills in order to convey the appropriate messages to prospective recipients of vaccinations.

West Australian parents' views on vaccinating their children against COVID-19: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Australian children and adolescents were among the last local cohorts offered COVID-19 vaccines. Despite promising initial uptake, coverage subsequently plateaued, requiring further efforts to improve access and build parents' recognition of the importance of COVID-19 vaccination. We sought to understand West Australian (WA) parents' willingness to vaccinate their children to inform strategies for improving uptake at the time in which they were becoming eligible.

METHODS

We undertook in-depth qualitative interviews with 30 parents of children aged 5-17 years from June - December 2021. During this period, children aged 12-15 years became eligible for vaccination; children aged 5-11 years became eligible shortly thereafter. Data were thematically analysed in NVivo.

RESULTS

Most parents intended on vaccinating their children once eligible. Parents sought to protect their children, to protect the community, to resume travel, and to get back to "normal". They reflected that vaccination against key infectious threats is a routine activity in childhood. Some were concerned about the vaccine, particularly mRNA vaccines, being new technology or impacting fertility. "Wait-awhiles" wanted to see what other parents would do or were delaying until they felt that there was a higher risk of COVID-19 in WA. Most parents of younger children wanted their child to be vaccinated at the general practice clinic due to familiarity and convenience. Parents were particularly eager for clear and consistent messaging about vaccination of children and adolescents, including safety, importance, scientific evidence, and personal stories.

CONCLUSION

For future pandemic vaccinations pertaining to children, governments and health officials need to address parents' concerns and meet their preferences for the delivery of the vaccine program to children and adolescents.

'I'm provax': Pro-vaccination personal histories and socialities of older Australians in the COVID-19 pandemic

Vaccination scholarship often explores how social networks foster vaccine refusal and delay, revealing how social and institutional relations produce refusing or delaying parents and un- or under-vaccinated children. It is likewise critical to understand the development of pro-vaccination orientations by researching those who want to be vaccinated since such attitudes and associated practices underpin successful vaccination programmes. This article explores pro-vaccination sociality, personal histories and self-understandings during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia. We draw upon 18 in-depth interviews with older Western Australians, documenting how they articulate 'provax' identities in opposition to those they depict as 'antivax' others. Provax identities were clearly anchored in and solidified through social relations and personal histories, as interviewees spoke of 'likeminded' friends and families who facilitated each other's vaccinations and referenced childhood experiences of epidemics and vaccinations. Access barriers relating to the vaccine programme drove interviewees to reimagine their provax status in light of not yet being vaccinated. Thus, interviewees' moral and ideological understandings of themselves and others were interrelated with supply-side constraints. We examine the development of self-proclaimed 'provaxxers' (in a context of limited access); how they imagine and enact boundaries between themselves and those they deem 'antivax'; and possibilities for public health research.

Diversity of attitudes towards complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and vaccines: A representative cross-sectional study in France

How much does endorsement of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) correlate with negative attitudes towards vaccines? One of the difficulties of analysing the relationship between attitudes to CAM and attitudes towards vaccines rests in the complexity of both. Which form of CAM endorsement is associated with what type of reticence towards vaccines? While the literature on the relationship between CAM and attitudes towards vaccines is growing, this question has not yet been explored. In this study we present the results of a survey conducted in July 2021 among a representative sample of the French mainland adult population (n = 3087). Using cluster analysis, we identified five profiles of CAM attitudes and found that even among the most pro-CAM group, very few respondents disagreed with the idea that CAM should only be used as a complement to conventional medicine. We then compared these CAM attitudes to vaccine attitudes. Attitudes to CAM had a distinct impact as well as a combined effect on attitudes to different vaccines and vaccines in general. However, we also found a) that attitudes to CAM provide a very limited explanation of vaccine hesitancy and b) that, among the hesitant, pro-CAM attitudes are often combined with other traits associated with vaccine hesitancy such as distrust of health agencies, radical political preferences and low income. Indeed, we found that both CAM endorsement and vaccine hesitancy are more prevalent among the socially disadvantaged. Drawing on these results, we argue that, to better understand the relationship between CAM and vaccine hesitancy, it is necessary to look at how both can reflect lack of access and recourse to mainstream medicine and distrust of public institutions.

Healthcare professional and professional stakeholders' perspectives on vaccine mandates in Switzerland: A mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

There currently are no mandatory vaccines in Switzerland. However, Swiss federal legislation allows for vaccination mandates in settings where the risk of transmission to vulnerable groups is high, such as healthcare professionals (HCPs) working with vulnerable patients. Since HCPs are trusted information sources, a priority population for COVID-19 vaccination, and potentially subjected to mandates, we investigated HCP perspectives on mandates.

METHODS

A national online survey was administered to HCPs (October 2020-March 2021), including vaccine mandates questions concerning patients (measles) and HCPs (influenza). We qualitatively investigated HCP mandate perspectives through: (1) 34 interviews with HCPs, HCP professional society representatives, and health authorities; (2) a focus group discussion (FGD) with complementary medicine (CM) and biomedical physicians, and Swiss Federal Vaccination Commission members.

RESULTS

1933 participants (496 physicians, 226 pharmacists, 607 nurses, 604 midwives) responded to the survey. Quantitative results show all professional groups preferred shared parent-HCP measles vaccine decisions (65%, 54%, 50%, 48%, respectively; p for trend < 0.001). Midwives (87%) and nurses (70%) preferred individual influenza vaccination decisions for HCPs, while physicians (49%) and pharmacists (44%) preferred shared employee-employer decisions (p for trend < 0.001). Physicians (p < .001) and pharmacists (p < .01) with CM training favored individual influenza vaccination decisions. Qualitative results show general HCP opposition to vaccine mandates, mainly because participants argued how other approaches, such as HCP training and better information, could encourage uptake. Arguments against COVID-19 mandates included insufficiently documented long-term safety/efficacy data. From participants' perspectives, mandated vaccination should be used as a last resort. Some participants expressed fear that with mandates, notably for influenza and COVID-19, some HCPs might leave their jobs. HCPs were unsure what vaccine mandates would concretely look like in practice, particularly regarding sanctions for non-compliance and enforcement.

CONCLUSION

In Switzerland, HCPs generally were opposed to vaccination mandates. Clarity and guidance are needed from health authorities to better inform discussions around vaccine mandates.

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To identify, describe and map the research tools used to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, refusal, acceptance and access in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

In March 2022, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Source Nursing, Africa Wide and APA PsychInfo for peer-reviewed literature in English related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, refusal, acceptance and access in SSA. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews to guide evidence gathering and as a template to present the evidence retrieval process.

RESULTS

In the studies selected for review (n=72), several measurement tools were used to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance and refusal. These measurements were willingness and intent to vaccinate from the perspectives of the general population, special population groups such as mothers, students and staff in academic institutions and healthcare workers and uptake as a proxy for measuring assumed COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Measurements of access to COVID-19 vaccination were cost and affordability, convenience, distance and time to travel or time waiting for a vaccine and (dis)comfort. Although all studies measured COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance and refusal, relatively few studies (n=16, 22.2%) included explicit measurements of access to COVID-19 vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the gaps identified in the scoping review, we propose that future research on determinants of COVID-19 vaccination in SSA should further prioritise the inclusion of access-related variables. We recommend the development and use of standardised research tools that can operationalise, measure and disentangle the complex determinants of vaccine uptake in future studies throughout SSA and other low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings.

'Corona is coming': COVID-19 vaccination perspectives and experiences amongst Culturally and Linguistically Diverse West Australians

BACKGROUND

Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) groups within high-income countries are at risk of being left behind by the COVID-19 vaccination rollout. They face both access and attitudinal barriers, including low trust in government and health authorities.

OBJECTIVE

To explore perceptions and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, as well as facilitators, barriers and strategies to promote uptake among CALD residents of Western Australia (WA), where there were almost no COVID-19 cases for 2 years.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Perth, WA's capital, was chosen as the state's study site because most of the state's CALD population lives there. Eleven semistructured in-depth interviews and three focus groups (with 37 participants) were conducted with CALD residents between August and October 2021. Thematic analysis was conducted, informed by the 'Capability', 'Opportunity', 'Motivation', 'Behaviour' model.

RESULTS

CALD participants faced barriers including a lack of knowledge about COVID-19 and the vaccines, low self-rated English proficiency and education levels, misinformation, passive government communication strategies and limited access to vaccine clinics/providers. They were, however, motivated to vaccinate by the imminent opening of state and international borders, trust in government and healthcare authorities, travel intentions and the desire to protect themselves and others.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high levels of trust and significant desire for vaccines among CALD communities in Perth, current strategies were not meeting their needs and the community remains at risk from COVID-19. Tailored intervention strategies are required to provide knowledge, address misinformation and facilitate access to ensure uptake of COVID-19 vaccines-including for additional doses-amongst CALD communities. Governments should work with trusted CALD community members to disseminate tailored COVID-19 vaccine information and adequately translated resources.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Community Reference Group at Telethon Kids Institute consulted on this project in September 2020; Ishar Multicultural Women's Health Services consulted on and facilitated the focus groups.

Agency and liminality during the COVID-19 pandemic: Why information literacy cannot fix vaccine hesitancy

This article employs a sociological and dialogical information perspective to identify what shape information literacy practice takes for people who are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine. An information perspective places information and people’s relations with information at the centre of the inquiry. The study carried out 14 semi-structured interviews with UK adults who had not yet received or taken up their invitation to have the COVID-19 vaccine. Outcomes of this study suggest that information literacy practices related to vaccine hesitancy emerged through the liminal space and in relation to agentic performance, which was catalysed through engagement with experiential, corporeal and social information. This study has implications for the teaching of information literacy, in particular, the idea that being informed is an affirmative action that will automatically empower learners to make appropriate choices.

Stigmatized for standing up for my child: A qualitative study of non-vaccinating parents in Australia

BACKGROUND

Vaccine refusal is highly polarizing in Australia, producing a challenging social landscape for non-vaccinating parents. We sought to understand the lived experience of non-vaccinating parents in contemporary Australia.

METHODS

We recruited a national sample of non-vaccinating parents of children <18 yrs, advertising on national radio, in playgrounds in low vaccination areas, and using snowballing. Grounded Theory methodology guided data collection (via semi-structured interviews). Inductive analysis identified stigmatization as a central concept; stigma theory was adopted as an analytical lens.

RESULTS

Twenty-one parents from regional and urban locations in five states were interviewed. Parent's described experiences point to systematic stigmatization which can be characterized using Link & Phelan's five-step process. Parents experienced (1) labelling and (2) stereotyping, with many not identifying with the "anti-vaxxers" portrayed in the media and describing frustration at being labelled as such, believing they were defending their child from harm. Participants described (3) social "othering", leading to relationship loss and social isolation, and (4) status loss and discrimination, feeling "brushed off" as incompetent parents and discriminated against by medical professionals and other parents. Finally, (5) legislative changes exerted power over their circumstances, rendering them unable to provide their children with the same financial and educational opportunities as vaccinated children, often increasing their steadfastness in refusing vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Non-vaccinating Australian parents feel stigmatized for defending their child from perceived risk of harm, reporting a range of social and psychological effects, as well as financial effects from policies which disadvantaged their children through differential financial treatment, and diminished early childhood educational opportunities. While it might be argued that social stigma and exclusionary policies directed a small minority for the greater good are justified, other more nuanced approaches based on better understandings of vaccine rejection could achieve comparable public health outcomes without the detrimental effect on unvaccinated families.

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

- Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

Public health practitioner perspectives on dealing with measles outbreaks if high anti-vaccination sentiment is present

Background

Communities with low vaccination rates are at greater risk during outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases. Most Australian parents support vaccines, but some refuse and are often judged harshly by their community, especially during an outbreak. We sought the perspectives of Australian public health experts on the key issues faced when managing a measles outbreak in an area with high anti-vaccination sentiment.

Methods

A measles outbreak scenario formed the basis of a 3-round modified Delphi process to identify key practitioner concerns in relation to parents/carers who don’t follow the recommended vaccination schedule. We surveyed a range of professionals in the field: policymakers, infectious disease experts, immunisation program staff, and others involved in delivering childhood vaccinations, to identify key priorities when responding to an outbreak in a community with low vaccination coverage.

Results

Findings indicate that responses to measles outbreaks in communities with high anti-vaccination sentiment are motivated by concerns about the potential for a much larger outbreak event. The highest operational priority is to isolate infected children. The two most highly ranked practical issues are mistrust from non-vaccinating members of the local region and combatting misinformation about vaccines. Trying to change minds of such individuals is not a priority during an outbreak, nor is vaccinating their children. Using media and social media to provide information about the outbreak and measures the public can take to limit the spread of the disease was a focus.

Conclusions

Our findings provide a deeper understanding of the challenges faced during an outbreak and priorities for communicating with communities where there is a high level of anti-vaccination sentiment. In the context of a global pandemic, the results of this study also have implications for managing public health responses to community transmission of SARS-CoV-2, as COVID-19 vaccines becomes widely available.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-10604-3.

Economic and Behavioral Influencers of Vaccination and Antimicrobial Use

Despite vast improvements in global vaccination coverage during the last decade, there is a growing trend in vaccine hesitancy and/or refusal globally. This has implications for the acceptance and coverage of a potential vaccine against COVID-19. In the United States, the number of children exempt from vaccination for “philosophical belief-based” non-medical reasons increased in 12 of the 18 states that allowed this policy from 2009 to 2017 (1). Meanwhile, the overuse and misuse of antibiotics, especially in young children, have led to increasing rates of drug resistance that threaten our ability to treat infectious diseases. Vaccine hesitancy and antibiotic overuse exist side-by-side in the same population of young children, and it is unclear why one modality (antibiotics) is universally seen as safe and effective, while the other (vaccines) is seen as potentially hazardous by some. In this review, we consider the drivers shaping the use of vaccines and antibiotics in the context of three factors: individual incentives, risk perceptions, and social norms and group dynamics. We illustrate how these factors contribute to the societal and individual costs of vaccine underuse and antimicrobial overuse. Ultimately, we seek to understand these factors that are at the nexus of infectious disease epidemiology and social science to inform policy-making.

"We are fierce, independent thinkers and intelligent": Social capital and stigma management among mothers who refuse vaccines

Despite measurable benefits of childhood vaccines, mothers with high levels of social privilege are increasingly refusing some or all vaccines for their children. These mothers are often clustered geographically or networked socially, providing information, emotional support, and validation for each other. Mothers who reject vaccines may face disapproval from others, criticism in popular culture, negative interactions with healthcare providers, and conflicts with people they know, which serve to stigmatize them. This article uses qualitative data from in-depth interviews with parents who reject vaccines, ethnographic observations, and analyses of online discussions to examine the role of social capital in networks of vaccine-refusing mothers. Specifically, this article explores how mothers provide each other information critical of vaccines, encourage a sense of one's self as empowered to question social expectations around vaccination, provide strategies for managing stigma that results from refusing vaccines, and define a sense of obligation to extend social capital to other mothers. In examining these strategies and tensions, we see how social capital can powerfully support subcultural norms that contradict broader social norms and provide sources of social support. Even as these forces are experienced as positive, they work in ways that actively undermine community health, particularly for those who are the most socially vulnerable to negative health outcomes from infection.