Opinion|Reader’s opinion
The young man had left the vaccination site without vaccination, as he should have chosen three vaccines and had no idea about them.
I am recently had a discussion about a coronavirus vaccine with a young person under the age of 30 who moved to the country a decade ago. When I first asked him what he thought of the vaccine, he said he would take it in the next half of the year, when there was more information about the side effects. This fall, however, the young man said he had decided to take the vaccine.
When I was in contact with him recently, I asked how the vaccination had gone. I was appalled when he said he had gone to the vaccination site at the appointed time, but left without vaccination: he should have chosen himself out of the three vaccines available and had no idea about them. Now the young man asked me which vaccine would be worth taking. I told you the name of the vaccine I received. The next day, I received another anxious message: the young man had heard about the news of complications of the Modern vaccine and said he was very scared of taking the coronary vaccine.
It is really important now to consider how to provide clear and factual information even to those whose knowledge of the Finnish language is not strong and who find it difficult to make a vaccination decision on the basis of fragmented information. For them, choosing a vaccine from among several options may be an impossible requirement. Good communication skills are also required from the vaccine provider, as leaving the vaccination site without the vaccine is a missed opportunity.
Marja Tiilikainen
researcher in charge, Institute of Migration
Reader opinions are speeches written by HS readers, selected and delivered by HS editorial. You can leave a comment or read the principles of the writing at www.hs.fi/kirjtamielipidekirjoitus/.
.
