Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/us/21vaccine.html?_r=1&ref=health&oref=slogin
California law permits school-aged children to obtain exemptions fro vaccination. Due to wide-spread misconception that vaccinations can cause neurological disorders and asthma, parents are becoming increasingly skeptical of vaccinations and deciding against having their children get vaccination. As a result, since 1990, there has been an increase in the number of children who do not get vaccination that will make them immune to diseases such as measles. Such trend has recently come to attention when several children were sent to the hospital with measles that could have been prevented with proper vaccination. The problem with measles is that the vaccination only has 95% percent success rate. Thus, the disease can spread from those without the vaccination to those who took the precautionary step to get vaccinated. However, some parents are adamant. “I refuse to sacrifice my children for the greater good,” said Sybil Carlson, a mom of a 6 year-old without the vaccination, who goes to a school where several kids were sent to the hospital with the measles. Many health officials and experts believe that such trend of parents choosing to exempt their child from vaccinations may become a problem. They even call these parents “parasites” who seem to benefit from the majority (90% nationwide) who have been vaccinated.
Several possible ethical problems arise. What about the child’s autonomy? Do the parents have a right to choose for their children whether to be vaccinated or not? What if this decision is misinformed? Do health officials – as the experts concerning vaccinations – have the right or obligation to ban exemptions?
I think that such exemptions to the requirement of vaccinations – accorded by individual request in 20 states including California, Ohio, and Texas – ought to be banned by the health officials. Although health officials took no part in the popularization of exemptions, they still have an obligation to help prevent infection of those who have taken proper care to get vaccinated.
2 comments:
I agree that vaccines should be mandatory. Parents have no right to endanger others' children as well as their own based on personal beliefs. It would be another thing entirely if their beliefs had some basis in science, but the vast majority of studies has not related vaccines with any of the conditions that these parents are worrying about. Opting out of a vaccination is like choosing to drive on the left side of the road because the driver is less likely to be kidnapped by aliens (well, perhaps it's not that outrageous...).
This is only one way that parents are able to avoid vaccinating their children. They can also declare religious objections. I think that these too should be banned, if the children are to attend public schools. I believe that this does not violate any part of the constitution. If parents feel so strongly about vaccines they can send their children to private schools or home school them. This is not unlike teaching evolution in schools. Some parents feel very strongly about it, and those that feel strongly enough pull their children out of the public education system. This leaves one last way in which vaccines can be avoided.
Some children have are born with certain conditions that make vaccines very dangerous to them. These children should be allowed to attend public schools without vaccines. For one, they represent such a small portion of the population that their presence will have little affect on the health of the population. Secondly, they did not choose to not have vaccines: it is simply not possible. And since this decision was forced upon them, we cannot discriminate against them.
I believe that parents should have the right to not vaccinate their children. Sure, they are inducing potential problems for everyone around the child, however, they are also putting their own child in danger. If parents want to be that stupid, then who are we to stop them? Furthermore, how would such a law be enforced? How could you make parents bring their child into the physicians office? You couldn't simply give all the vaccinations as soon as the child was born. At the end of the day, people are going to do what the want if they believe strongly in something. If parents truly believe that their child is going to be exposed to cancer from the measles vaccination, then no law requiring vaccination will actually help the situation.
Of course, I believe that children should be vaccinated and that in an ideal world, 100% would be. However, I just think that a requirement law would do no good. What are you going to do, throw a parent in jail for not having their child vaccinated? Or show up at their home with a needle?
I think the thing to do is to try to educate the parents on the benefits of vaccination to their child. Skip the part about the great good because obviously, some parents are sick of that. It seems that the parents not vaccinating their children are doing so because they are concerned about their child's health (as ironic as that is) and they don't care about any other child. So, educate them and tell how naive it is to think that the measles vaccination causes cancer, and inform them of how bad measles is and how getting the vaccine will almost certainly stop their kid from getting the disease.
Post a Comment