Vaccine Passports In Georgia? Most Patch Readers Say No

GEORGIA — An overwhelming majority of Georgia Patch readers who responded to our survey are against the idea of a statewide vaccine passport — a kind of digital credential that would show a person's vaccination status or recent negative COVID-19 test result as a way for them to possibly attend sporting events or enter businesses.

As more and more people are vaccinated against COVID-19, the idea of a vaccine passport has been in the public discourse, and states are taking steps to either explore the idea or reject it altogether.

Patch received more than 2,500 responses to our survey, with more than 62 percent of respondents saying they opposed the idea of a vaccine passport. More than 78 percent of those respondents said they had data privacy concerns around the use of such a credential. When asked about the specific types of concerns they had, readers said they should be able to keep medical information private.

Editor's note: The survey was not a scientific poll with random sampling and weighting by race, education or other factors, and should be viewed only as a broad gauge of public sentiment.

Many readers cited the medical privacy law HIPAA and claimed it would be a violation of the law to require a vaccine passport. However, a fact check of this claim makes it clear that is not the case. The law's privacy rule only applies to entities like hospitals and doctors' offices, and prevents them from sharing medical information with third parties, as The Washington Post explained.

"HIPAA doesn't apply if nobody involved is part of the medical system; it's not technically a medical record," Carmel Shachar, a Harvard Law lecturer, told Slate in December.

A fact-check by 11Alive also found that an individual voluntarily sharing medical information is consenting to let that information be shared.

That's not to say there aren't legitimate privacy concerns around the use of a vaccine passport, as digital data breaches are now common.

The nearly 38 percent of respondents who said they supported a vaccine passport shared some settings where they felt such a passport could be used. Below is a sampling of the locations:

• Travel
• Sporting events
• Concerts
• Dining-in
• Theaters
• Fitness clubs
• Festivals
• Large gatherings
• Private businesses
• Schools and colleges

The vast majority — more than 95 percent — of respondents in favor of the passport also said they did not have data privacy concerns around the use of such a passport.

"I really don’t have concerns because it’s possible to enact a system that only requires you to provide proof that you’re vaccinated to get the pass," one reader said. "The proof would be provided to entities that already know you’ve been vaccinated. The pass itself shouldn’t show much else besides your name, maybe birthday, and that you are vaccinated."

"I have far less privacy concerns from a vaccine passport than standard phone GPS tracking or social media," another reader wrote.

One reader said, "there are always data privacy concerns because there is always someone trying to hack into some system just to wreak havoc."

Another mused, "I don’t think it should be mandatory, but can be required by private businesses for entry to their events."

Most readers (93 percent) who were opposed to the idea of a vaccine passport said they did not believe residents should have to show proof of vaccination. When it came to letting private businesses and employers put their own policies in place, a smaller yet still overwhelming majority (more than 78 percent) of these readers, said they were opposed to it.

Those opposed to the passports were also largely against health screenings like temperature checks at restaurants and movie theaters (75 percent), COVID-19 vaccine requirements for domestic or international air travel (91 percent) and a majority (more than 78 percent) said they would not feel safer attending an event or eating at a restaurant knowing others around them had been vaccinated for COVID-19.

"My health choices do not belong in the hands of anyone else but me. Not the government, and not any private business," one reader wrote.

"You have no idea what anyone’s medical history is now," another person wrote. "Why should this be any different."

"Nothing should be mandatory we have free will, and we have rights to not be medically discriminated against for not getting vaccines or wearing a mask or refusing a fever test," a reader said.

Another said, "I personally believe that people should be able to choose if they want the vaccines or not. If not, they shouldn't be judged any less than if they chose to get the vaccine."

Patch Editors Shannon Antinori and Kara McIntyre contributed to this article.