For most of us, going to the doctor
for vaccinations was hardly an event we looked forward to, but we knew we had
to do it. In the past decade, however,
some parents have started to refuse vaccinations for their children.
This leads to one obvious question:
why? It seems like protecting your child from the likes of measles, polio, and
numerous other once-common childhood diseases would be a primary concern for
parents. Many, however, believe that the
vaccines do more harm than good.
One major cause for fear in many
parents is the belief that vaccinations somehow overwhelm their child’s immune
system or leads to autism. This belief
became widespread after the 1998 publishing of a report linking the MMR vaccine
to autism. Although the paper has been
shown to be false and its author, Andrew Wakefield, discredited, the specter
and implications of the paper remain in some parents’ minds. Another possible reason may be that few
parents are able to remember a time when many of these were common childhood
diseases. Some of these parents then choose to bypass vaccinations altogether
because they see the risk of contracting a now uncommon disease as far less
than any perceived risk of developing autism.
In response, some family doctors have chosen to “fire” parents who
refuse to vaccinate their children.
Who is in the right? Are the parent’s concerns unfounded? There have been numerous studies disproving
any relationship between vaccines and autism. I believe it is negligence for
any parent to prevent their child from being vaccinated. This is not only for their own child’s
benefit, but also for the benefit of other peoples’ children. One of the strengths of universal
vaccinations is that it builds up a group resistance to diseases. This prevents these diseases from taking hold
again, which leads to virtual extinction of most of them.
But the question remains: what
should doctors do when parents refuse vaccines for their children? Even if the parent’s are negligent, what is
the doctor’s role? Should they continue
to care for a family even if the parents refuse vaccinations? One recent trend has been for doctors to ask
families to leave their practice. I
believe that it is each doctor’s right to make this decision, as many do not
want to deal with uncooperative parents or potentially placing other patients
at risk. In the end, however, if a
doctor is unable to convince the parents, then the family leaving has
accomplished nothing except placing them in a position without a regular family
doctor until they can find one who will accommodate their wishes. It boils down this: does the doctor have an
obligation to care for a child even if their parents are uncooperative? It’s hard to say, but for the moment, it is a
decision that many doctors, for better or for worse, are having to make for themselves.
source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203315804577209230884246636.html
7 comments:
This is a very large problem. Especially in some "hippy" communities for lack of a better word. In Berkeley California the immunization rates for children in K-12 are ten to 20 percent lower than compared to other school districts of similar size. This creates a problem because the idea of a vaccine is to create a heard immunity so that viruses or bacterium do not get the chance to mutate into new forms that are resistant to vaccines. If the vaccination rate is only 60% like in some Berkeley schools it creates an increased chance for resistant strands of bacteria and viruses to emerge.
Vaccination practices should be more widely enforced if your child is to attend public schools. It is my opinion that schools should only accept waivers for vaccinations if their current student population is over a threshold percentage of vaccinated students. Otherwise the parent should be forced to find another school, or the child should be forced to wear a mask during breakouts of infection as is done in hospitals.
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/2010IZRateTable.pdf
No doctors have the right to refuse care to any patient if parents are not allowing their children to receive vaccines. There is no way that we can instigate doctors to help patients that they do not want to. Your career and who you choose to work for is your choice. Just like a professional can choose not to work with a difficult client no doctor is morally obligated to work for a difficult patient or family. Also providing care to un-vaccinated individuals puts the doctor's other patients at risk. Additionally parents who choose not to pursue vaccination for their child should be evaluated for other negligences in their parenting.
*NO, Doctors....
The question “what should doctors do when parents refuse vaccines for their children?” is a very interesting and relevant question in today’s times. As modern medicine progresses, how should we deal with people who refuse to reap its benefits, and not only put themselves at risk, but put their peers at risk as well?
This notion of “firing the parents” and forcing them to leave from a doctor’s practice seems to be a good middle ground between the two extremes of completely ignoring the problem and forcing children to be vaccinated. Clearly, it is unethical to be on either extreme, for one, if doctors don’t somehow encourage parents to vaccinate their children they are putting the rest of society in harm’s way, since unvaccinated children may infect younger children who have not yet been completely vaccinated. On the other hand, forcing children to be vaccinated is also unethical because it violates all the principles of informed consent medical ethics is founded on.
However, this middle ground carefully treads on the border between ethical and unethical. First, as long as a patient is not in any immediate danger or need, no one will deny that a doctor has the right to deny treatment of the patient. This is exactly what is happening here, the pediatricians are not accepting patients who refuse vaccinations, but in emergencies these parents can still bring their children to the emergency room in hospitals – so they are not being denied medical care altogether. In fact, it is even arguable that parents who turn their back on modern medicine, and endanger their children and others’ children, should not be allowed to gain any benefits from medicine whatsoever. Secondly, refusing families a regular pediatrician in many ways, serves as an incentive for parents to get their children vaccinated, which is for the good of society as a whole. For instance, Dr. LaReau, a pediatrician who doesn’t accept unvaccinated children as patients, noted that many families decided to get their children inoculated after receiving the ultimatum that they would have leave the practice if they did not.
In general, this policy seems to be working, as in recent years the basic vaccination rate has gone up from 73% to 76%. On top of that, most parents who don’t get their children vaccinated, or delay a vaccination don’t actually have any medical reasons against vaccinations; in fact, over 40% of the time parents don’t get their children vaccinated they cite some sort of inconvenience such as their child being sick, or being too busy, or not having adequate transportation. Additionally, 88% of parents who refused to get at least one vaccine actually believe that vaccines are necessary to protect children. As a result, if doctors become strict about not accepting children who don’t get vaccinated, many of these parents will become properly incentivized to get their children vaccinated, and much of this problem will be resolved.
http://children.webmd.com/vaccines/news/20100505/more-parents-refuse-delay-childs-vaccination
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203315804577209230884246636.html
Fascinating topic, good responses. DMRD will need to cite the statistics and answer his own questions at the end of the post. Don't end on something that says "It's hard to say..." Easy fixes if you decide to keep for R4
Post a Comment