GOOD SAMARITAN: Decision making without politics

By Karen Edmondson, MS, LPC, NCC

The Centers for Disease Control has recommended governmental mandates to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. The public use of vaccines against the virus has become a controversial issue that has created a powerful division in opinion. Individuals have the right to refuse the vaccine. Others who are vaccinated argue that this will put them at risk. What we choose to do or not do is a personal choice. In February 2019, I had written an article on William Gassers’ Three R’s of Decision Making. The three questions include: is it right, responsible and realistic.

1. Is it Right for you? The only person who knows what is right for you is you.

2. Is it Responsible? Which choice will cause the least amount of harm to everyone involved including yourself?

3. Is it Realistic? Is it do-able?

If you say yes to all three, it is good decision.

If it is not right or responsible, don’t do it (bad decision).

If it is right and responsible, but not do-able, do problem solving to make it do-able.

When answering the question if it is right for you: you need to filter the choices through your value system (not someone else’s values). To be responsible you want to do the least harm. This is a weighing process of evaluating the cost if you say yes and do it and the cost of saying no and don’t do it? Most choices will involve some harm, the goal to minimize it. Finally, is it realistic, or do you have the resources to do it. Some may choose to not have the vaccine due to their faith, fears or personal values. Others couldn’t imagine why anyone would refuse the vaccine. The decision making model based on your personal values and current beliefs. If your situation changes, you can make a different choice.