Childhood measles vaccinations have been a topic of interest again recently following the multitude of measles outbreaks worldwide. While the large number of deaths accompanying these outbreaks is due to several reasons, vaccine hesitancy seems to be the biggest cause. Vaccine mandates remain a common measure for fostering vaccine uptake and maintaining herd immunity. Arguments for (and against) measles vaccine mandates principally focus on scientific facts and consequences, herd immunity, and citizen liberties. Focusing attention primarily on measles vaccination and taking Africa as the context, we advance a different claim- that vaccine hesitancy in some cases is plausibly justifiable. Notably, we contend that vaccine hesitancy, in some circumstances, may be the language of the unheard or the failure to engage previous medical injustices. Thus, it requires us to think deeply about how relevant actors can amend the plight of these exploited communities. To interrogate this question, we draw on the theory of distributive justice grounded in African moral philosophies.

This was a purely normative study. The research method comprised a literature search on the primary sources while research articles on the causes of measles outbreaks and vaccine hesitancy were reviewed. From these materials, using African moral values, we developed an ethical argument in support of the thesis.

This research highlights that in Africa there is a moral duty to initiate measures to address the power dynamics (that is, where one party in the communal relationship is more powerful) and empower communities. Only then vaccine uptake campaigns can be successful.