Childhood abuse leads to COVID vaccine hesitancy
Listen to this article
Reluctance or refusal to get jabbed against COVID-19 infection (vaccine hesitancy), may be linked to traumatic events in childhood, such as neglect, domestic violence or substance misuse in the family home, suggests research published in the open access journal BMJ Open.
Vaccine hesitancy was 3 times higher among people who had experienced 4 or more types of trauma as a child than it was among those who hadn’t experienced any, the findings show.
Childhood adversity is strongly linked to poor mental health. And some studies have suggested that mistreatment as a child may undermine subsequent trust, including in health and other public services.
To explore this further, the researchers wanted to find out whether childhood trauma might be linked to current levels of trust in health systems information; support for, and compliance with, COVID-19 restrictions; and intention to get vaccinated against the infection.
They drew on the responses to a nationally representative survey of adults living in Wales between December 2020 and March 2021, a period during which restrictions to curb the spread of COVID-19 infection were in force. Out of an initial 6763 people contacted, the responses of 2285 who met all the eligibility criteria and who had answered all the questions were included in the final analysis.
The survey asked about 9 types of childhood trauma before the age of 18: physical, verbal, and sexual abuse; parental separation; exposure to domestic violence; and living with a household member with mental illness, alcohol and/or drug misuse, or who was in prison.
And it collected personal details and experiences of long-term health conditions, levels of trust in health service information on COVID-19, and attitudes towards COVID-19 restrictions and vaccination.
Around half (52%) of the respondents said that they hadn’t experienced any childhood trauma. But around 1 in 5 said they had experienced 1 type; around 1 in 6 (17%) reported 2-3; and 1 in 10 (10%) reported 4 or more.
Respondents who expressed little or no trust in official COVID-19 information and who felt government restrictions were very unfair were more likely to favor the immediate ending of regulations on social distancing and mandatory face coverings. And they were more likely to say they had flouted the regulations occasionally and to profess reluctance or refusal to get jabbed.
For example, four out of 10 of those reporting low levels of trust in government COVID-19 information also reported vaccine hesitancy, compared with just 6% of those who did trust this source of information.
And a similar proportion of those who didn’t really trust scientific COVID-19 information admitted to flouting the regulations occasionally, compared with around 1 in 4 of those who did trust this source.
Increasing numbers of childhood traumas were independently associated with low levels of trust in official COVID-19 information, feeling that government restrictions were unfair, and wanting mandatory face coverings to be ditched.
Support for jettisoning mandatory face coverings was 4 times as high among those who had experienced 4 or more types of childhood trauma as it was among those who said they hadn’t experienced any. Younger age, male gender, and no history of long-term conditions were also significantly associated with this stance.
Experience of 4 or more types of childhood trauma was also associated with a desire to end social distancing. Also, the likelihood of admitting to flouting COVID-19 restrictions occasionally rose in tandem with the childhood trauma count.
Vaccine hesitancy was 3 times higher among those with a childhood trauma count of 4 or more and higher in younger age groups.
Based on all their findings, the researchers estimated the likely rates of vaccine hesitancy according to childhood trauma and age: these ranged from around 3.5% among those aged 70 and above with no experience of childhood adversity, to 38% among 18–29 year olds who had experienced 4 or more types of childhood trauma.
The researchers point out that people who have experienced childhood trauma are “known to have greater health risks across the life-course. Results here suggest such individuals may have more difficulty with compliance with public health control measures and consequently require additional support.”
So, what? An interesting and broader question arises from this study: To what extent is the proclivity to support anti-science politicians such as DT in the US or BJ in the UK a result of childhood trauma? If that is so, then we are in a very dangerous situation going forward because most recent studies have shown an alarming rise in the instances of spousal and child abuse—up by 100% in some areas of the US and 70% in the EU (WHO figures).
Read more on childhood trauma.
Join the discussion
More from this issue of TR
People are fast and accurate when making high-value decisions
Most researchers have long thought that people are less sensitive to changes in value as the overall value of an item increases. For example, it seems like it should be more difficult to tell the difference between a $50,000 car and a $55,000 car than between a $5,000 car and $10,000 car. Even though the difference in value is the same, the fraction of the total value is much smaller in the higher priced car, supposedly making it harder to notice.
When job seekers are "overqualified," gender bias may come into play
Hiring managers are suspicious about overqualified male candidates’ motivations; they’re deemed “flight risks” and passed over for fear that they’ll decamp for better opportunities. But overqualified women are more likely to be hired despite their excessive qualifications.
You might be interested inBack to Today's Research
Long working hours are bad for your heart.
People who work long hours have an increased risk of developing an irregular heart rhythm known as atrial fibrillation, according to a study of nearly 85,500 men and women published in the European Heart Journal.
How to predict how much you‘ll earn
You can go to a palmist, a Tarot reader, or a career counselor to get an idea of your likely future earnings. They will probably be about as accurate as each other. Now, for the first time, an interesting piece of research enables researchers to rank the most important factors that predict future affluence –and the findings might surprise you.
Being male, BMI, smoking and depression all increase biological age
Most programs aiming to help the elderly have focused too much on just chronological age, overlooking the fact that people age at different rates depending on their genes, their lifestyle and the stressors that have occurred in their lives.
Join our tribe
Subscribe to Dr. Bob Murray’s Today’s Research, a free weekly roundup of the latest research in a wide range of scientific disciplines. Explore leadership, strategy, culture, business and social trends, and executive health.