The National Immunization Programme in Australia

Health Care Systems 1
Health Care Systems: The National Immunization Programme
Author
Course:
Tutor:
Institution:
Date:

Health Care Systems 2
Health Care Systems: The National Immunization Programme
Overview
Recently, there have been a lot of improvements in the Australian National
Immunization Program (NIP). For instance, more partners, stakeholders, and vaccines have
been introduced in the schedule of the program and besides, the plans for purchasing and
monitoring vaccines to guarantee safety have been implemented. Thus, the general aim of the
NIP is to analyse the existing stock of vaccines, focus on the strengths and pinpoint the areas
that need more improvements.
This report focuses on the non-hospital based National Immunisation Programme
(NIP), a recognised cooperative programme encompassing the territory, state, and Australian
governments. Under the programme, necessary vaccines are freely availed to the entitled
adults, youths, children and infants with the main aim of preventing infections and serious
results by optimizing immunisation coverage in Australian citizens. To achieve this objective,
the NIP aligns with the efforts of commonwealth, territory and state government whose main
objective is to improve health care by mainly focusing on the desirable preventive strategies
rather the infection itself.
The Need
Immunisation helps in saving lives. Since the 1950s, many children died annually
from preventable illnesses such as whooping cough, tetanus, and diphtheria. Currently, the
major immunisation programmes such as the NIP established in the early 1970s greatly
reduced the deaths resulting from such infections (Betterhealth.vic.gov.au, 2018). Therefore,
immunisation has been among the best ways of protecting Australian adults, youths, children,
infants and successive generations from preventable infections and hence the need for non-
hospital-based immunisation programs such as the NIP.

Health Care Systems 3
Activities
Also, NIP engages in a set of activities which include the provision of leadership
responsible for policy enactment, enforcement, and evaluation of the NIP. Also, NIP is
responsible for negotiation and consultation with the cohorts on the establishment of the
service delivery, strategies, and priorities of the programme. Thirdly, the program establishes
the required time-limited and task-focused groups, and works with several peak associated
immunisation communities such as the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register
Management Committee (ACIRMC) and Communicable Diseases Network Australia
(CDNA) on aspects concerning strategy establishment and program enforcement
(Health.gov.au, 2018). Since the NIP is a collaboration between international, national, state
and territory governments, it promotes the working relationship that underlies the policy of
immunisation and lastly, the program reports to the Australian Health Ministers Advisory
Council (AHMAC) via the (CDNA) on programs and policies of immunisation
(Health.gov.au, 2018).
Resources
The NIP has been mainly funded by the federal and state governments of Australia
since it was established in the early 1970s. Additionally, the NIP collaborates with the GAVI
alliance, a private international health partnership also funded by the Australian government
(Gavialliance.org, 2018). The alliance in turn funds and supports vaccine manufacturers and
institutions that assist the NIP with resources such as vaccines, schedule development, and
immunisation techniques.
Ethical Considerations
This report describes several ethical issues related to the operations of the NIP. For
the ethical justification of the NIP operations, the program embraced ideologies and
operations that are ethically sound. The program aimed at benefiting the individuals and the

Health Care Systems 4
entire community. Also, NIP focused on adequately serious infections that validate the
expenses and risks of the program, and susceptible target groups within the population
(Isaacs, 2012). The ethical issues highlighted in this report encompass the respect for
people’s rights or consent, fairness or accessibility to all the vulnerable target groups,
benefiting the whole community and causing no harm to those involved.
Consent
Consent refers to the voluntary acceptance by a person to the suggested process,
provided after enough, suitable and trustworthy information about the process, encompassing
the probable benefits and risks. According to the NIP, every individual is entitled to adequate
information (if possible, written) on the benefits and risks of the various vaccines, including
the potential negative effects, their frequency and what should be done to counteract them. To
adhere to the ethical consent, NIP provides a table that contains the side effects of the
vaccines it uses for immunisation (The Australian immunisation handbook, 2013).
Thus, NIP indicates that for an ethical valid consent, it must include elements such as
administering the vaccines in a voluntary manner without manipulation, coercion or undue
pressure (Browne et al., 2015). Also, the program administers the vaccines after explaining
the potential benefits and risks, the risk of avoiding the vaccine, and proposing an alternative
option to the individuals if available. Lastly, the individual should be allowed enough
chances to seek further explanations or clarification regarding the vaccines before making the
final decision (Philip, 2015). Therefore, permission from the individuals should be granted
before any vaccination and it should be established that there are no existing health
conditions that contradict the immunisation. Consent involves autonomy as explained below.
Autonomy
Autonomy respect is among the most significant ethical principles. In most countries,
it is acceptable that people make autonomous choices regarding their health and that of their