OT Should Parents Have A Say In Whether Or Not They Vaccinate Their Children?

[caitlyn_the_camille]

I know I come to Fierce Board for a lot of boring real life stuff, but there are a lot of smart people here whose opinions I really respect, so you'll have to forgive me.
I'm writing a research paper in English that's worth 30% of my grade, and the topic I chose was the right of parents to choose whether or not they vaccinate their kids. It felt like a good idea at the time, as it's current and controversial (which is what the professor was looking for), and there are a lot of hard facts and scholarly articles arguing both sides.
In Louisiana there is a law that in order to attend a public school (including public universities), one must meet a vaccination requirement. I tried to find such legislature in other states, but not much came up, although I could not be looking in the right place. It's always seemed like a no-brainer to me that a parent would be all for vaccinating their children, but the more I study it, I can at least see where those that are anti-vaccines are coming from. I also don't know anyone personally who is against it. The side I chose to argue in the paper was pro-vaccinating, because IMO the good outweighs the bad.
My three points are:
1. Not vaccinating one's child puts other children at risk.
2. There's no hard evidence linking vaccines to disorders such as Autism, which is a common argument made.
3. Vaccines work to protect future generations and can even eradicate diseases completely, such as with smallpox.
I'd love to hear opinions of actual parents on this matter, especially any parents that may be against it. I feel like articles on the Internet can only give me so much. Thanks in advance for your time!

 

[Just-a-Mom]

I'll probably keep my opinion to myself (for now at least) but pretty much all states have that law.

The problem is that people can use a waiver of religious beliefs (in every state they can do this) to get around the law. By stating that vaccines are against their religious beliefs, they can still put their kids in public schools, even without vaccinations.

 

[caitlyn_the_camille]

I'll probably keep my opinion to myself (for now at least) but pretty much all states have that law.

The problem is that people can use a waiver of religious beliefs (in every state they can do this) to get around the law. By stating that vaccines are against their religious beliefs, they can still put their kids in public schools, even without vaccinations.

Interesting, I had no idea. I came across an article about a measles outbreak causing an Arizona school to basically suspend for a long time all the kids who weren't vaccinated for it, as a safety precaution, and their parents had no intentions of getting them those vaccines so they could go back to school. It was a TIME article, so a reputable souce.

About the religion thing, that is difficult. I talked to my dad about my paper tonight as both he and my mom work around this sort of thing every day (which is actually why I made this thread and didn't just ask them; they're a little biased), and even he was very careful with how he talked about this where religion is concerned. He's been in situations where he's delivered a baby who was going to die without a blood transfusion, but the baby's parents religion prohibited that, which terrifies me. It's impossible to ever know if someone is truly serious when they pull the religious beliefs card(unrelated to the case above), but I think we as a country try so hard to be politically correct all the time that we let people get away with absolute stupidity (like that religion where they worship spaghetti...). For example, you're required to have a doctors excuse if you miss cheer practice saying your sick, but one time we had a girl (who was not in fact sick) say her parents didn't believe in taking her to the doctor so coach would just have to accept a parent note. What's a person in authority to do?

 

[nicolee]

I'm not a parent but I'm a science student and the daughter of scientists. This is an issue that I feel unbelievably strongly about.

Without getting too technical, there's a thing called herd immunity that allows indirect protection from infectious disease when a large percentage of the population has become immune to that infection. The greater the proportion of the population that is immune (through previous exposure or, more importantly, vaccination), the lower the possibility of transmission. This is a scientifically proven fact, and we've been able to eradicate diseases this way (most notably smallpox) or diseases to almost negligible amounts (like measles or polio).

I'm not sure how detailed you want to get scientifically on this since it's an English paper, but I think you'll need to do quite a bit of research on the medical side of things. For example, there is no credible hard evidence that vaccines cause autism or an increased risk of disease. Anti-vaccine people will claim there is, but no real research has been accepted by medical or scientific journals. Studies cited by anti-vaxers (eg. Wakefield – look that one up, it's a doozy) are almost always fraudulent, unethical or inconclusive.

Clearly it's a freedom issue in the US. People claim that vaccination is against their religious beliefs, or that it's their right to parent their child however they wish. But this can, and should, be overruled in the interest of public safety. For example, some loony might claim it's their religious right to stone a disobedient woman to death, but the court is going to rule against them seeing as it's in the state's interest to, you know, stop murders. Not vaccinating a child propagates the spread of preventable infectious diseases, and puts others at risk. Freedom of religion arguments should be overruled here.

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

My thoughts/questions - this may be a dumb question, but if the majority of kids are vaccinated, how are the ones who aren't putting other kids at risk? Aren't the only ones at risk those that willfully chose not to be vaccinated? Like if 95 kids are vacinnated against the measels, and 5 chose not to get the vaccine, then one of the 5 gets measles, wouldn't the 95 kids be safe and the only ones at risk 4 other non-vacinnated ones?

These parents that claim religious beliefs about why they refuse to vacinatte - do they still go ahead and give their kid penicillin when they get an ear infection? I just think there's got to be a lot of hypocrisy in making such a claim and I don't think I could lie about something like that (lying about my religious beliefs - just seems way too wrong to me). Personally, I think I'd just send my kids to a private school or homeschool before I'd lie for 12 years like that.

I vacinnated my kids, but I do understand both sides of the debate. Until they can fully explain the reasons behind the increase in autism diagnoses in recent years, I can see why people are nervous.

 

[caitlyn_the_camille]

I'm not a parent but I'm a science student and the daughter of scientists. This is an issue that I feel unbelievably strongly about.

Without getting too technical, there's a thing called herd immunity that allows indirect protection from infectious disease when a large percentage of the population has become immune to that infection. The greater the proportion of the population that is immune (through previous exposure or, more importantly, vaccination), the lower the possibility of transmission. This is a scientifically proven fact, and we've been able to eradicate diseases this way (most notably smallpox) or diseases to almost negligible amounts (like measles or polio).

I'm not sure how detailed you want to get scientifically on this since it's an English paper, but I think you'll need to do quite a bit of research on the medical side of things. For example, there is no credible hard evidence that vaccines cause autism or an increased risk of disease. Anti-vaccine people will claim there is, but no real research has been accepted by medical or scientific journals. Studies cited by anti-vaxers (eg. Wakefield – look that one up, it's a doozy) are almost always fraudulent, unethical or inconclusive.

Clearly it's a freedom issue in the US. People claim that vaccination is against their religious beliefs, or that it's their right to parent their child however they wish. But this can, and should, be overruled in the interest of public safety. For example, some loony might claim it's their religious right to stone a disobedient woman to death, but the court is going to rule against them seeing as it's in the state's interest to, you know, stop murders. Not vaccinating a child propagates the spread of preventable infectious diseases, and puts others at risk. Freedom of religion arguments should be overruled here.

Oh yeah, I've definitely looked into herd immunity! I'd love to take the time to sit down and study it more, it's really cool. I probably won't go into vast scientific detail in the paper, but I am looking into it just because this is something I'd like to understand more about and because unfortunately I doubt it's a subject that will have gone away by the time I have children of my own (unless we make some major breakthroughs between now and then). I am making note to look into Wakefield... Something about that sort of thing fascinates me. (Off subject-ish, but for some reason I get more out of learning how to do something by seeing it done/doing it the wrong way. This has stood in every aspect of my life, to conducting research to doing eye makeup to tumbling; if I can see it done wrong, then I can benefit way more by making my own mental corrections.)

I agree with you that it is more of a freedom issue in the US. While it's obviously for the best, sometimes what's for the best isn't necessarily constitutional. There's a lot of gray area there. (As there is with a lot of things, unfortunately.) Looking at it from a legal standpoint, I struggle to see how it would be constitutional for the government to mandate medical practices on children (although technically they don't downright force them; only if you're enrolling in public education). The only argument that could be made would be that it puts others at risk, but to many people would come out and say the the vaccines themselves put others at risk, which they might and we just can't prove it yet. This poses the question for me, if you work for a government organization, like the postal service, are you required to be immunized? I know they require some specific immunizations in the armed forces if you're going overseas, but I feel like surely they would just in general too. (Note: I feel like my sentences aren't running together smoothly as it's late and I'm tired, so I'm sorry!) But then, a pro-vaccinations person could argue that anyone who goes in a post office, or an airport or a shopping mall, or anywhere where they're surrounded by a lot of people, should be vaccinated, and, well, it could spiral out of control very quickly. Again, a lot of gray area.

 

[caitlyn_the_camille]

My thoughts/questions - this may be a dumb question, but if the majority of kids are vaccinated, how are the ones who aren't putting other kids at risk? Aren't the only ones at risk those that willfully chose not to be vaccinated? Like if 95 kids are vacinnated against the measels, and 5 chose not to get the vaccine, then one of the 5 gets measles, wouldn't the 95 kids be safe and the only ones at risk 4 other non-vacinnated ones?

These parents that claim religious beliefs about why they refuse to vacinatte - do they still go ahead and give their kid penicillin when they get an ear infection? I just think there's got to be a lot of hypocrisy in making such a claim and I don't think I could lie about something like that (lying about my religious beliefs - just seems way too wrong to me). Personally, I think I'd just send my kids to a private school or homeschool before I'd lie for 12 years like that.

I vacinnated my kids, but I do understand both sides of the debate. Until they can fully explain the reasons behind the increase in autism diagnoses in recent years, I can see why people are nervous.

What RobinSparkles said; I didn't realize it but a lot of people cannot be vaccinated for one reason or another. I just came across a really great website that I'll definitely be citing if anyone's interested:
Vaccines ProCon.org
I haven't seen anything break it down that clearly so far. The first fact listed on it is some stuff I was confused about that Just-a-Mom already cleared up for me. I agree about the hypocrisy though; All these people who so openly hate medicine (or even cops, or the military) don't complain when they're saving their lives. I was vaccinated when I was little and I'm so thankful to my parents because I've always had a crappy immune system, and every time something is going around I catch it. I feel like it'd be way worse without those shots I don't even remember getting as a baby, lol. And yeah, the lack of medical knowledge about the causes of autism is definitely cause for concern. It makes me sad that everything written off as a "personality disorder" is taken less seriously in biological research, but that could be a whole different paper.

 

[nicolee]

Oh yeah, I've definitely looked into herd immunity! I'd love to take the time to sit down and study it more, it's really cool. I probably won't go into vast scientific detail in the paper, but I am looking into it just because this is something I'd like to understand more about and because unfortunately I doubt it's a subject that will have gone away by the time I have children of my own (unless we make some major breakthroughs between now and then). I am making note to look into Wakefield... Something about that sort of thing fascinates me. (Off subject-ish, but for some reason I get more out of learning how to do something by seeing it done/doing it the wrong way. This has stood in every aspect of my life, to conducting research to doing eye makeup to tumbling; if I can see it done wrong, then I can benefit way more by making my own mental corrections.)

I agree with you that it is more of a freedom issue in the US. While it's obviously for the best, sometimes what's for the best isn't necessarily constitutional. There's a lot of gray area there. (As there is with a lot of things, unfortunately.) Looking at it from a legal standpoint, I struggle to see how it would be constitutional for the government to mandate medical practices on children (although technically they don't downright force them; only if you're enrolling in public education). The only argument that could be made would be that it puts others at risk, but to many people would come out and say the the vaccines themselves put others at risk, which they might and we just can't prove it yet. This poses the question for me, if you work for a government organization, like the postal service, are you required to be immunized? I know they require some specific immunizations in the armed forces if you're going overseas, but I feel like surely they would just in general too. (Note: I feel like my sentences aren't running together smoothly as it's late and I'm tired, so I'm sorry!) But then, a pro-vaccinations person could argue that anyone who goes in a post office, or an airport or a shopping mall, or anywhere where they're surrounded by a lot of people, should be vaccinated, and, well, it could spiral out of control very quickly. Again, a lot of gray area.

There are definitely a lot of jobs that require you to be immunized. There is absolutely no way that anyone working in the healthcare sector in any capacity could get a job without proof of complete immunization, regardless of religious beliefs. Similarly for military staff. As to postal workers and other government workers, I'm not sure, but I'd presume immunization would be a requirement of many federal jobs.

The thing is that not vaccinating your child does put others at risk. That, to me, is the crux of the issue. A parent is technically within their right to act in a certain way for their child's own health, but in my opinion the state should be able to mandate what a parent does when it affects the rest of the community. It's in the state's interest to prevent disease, and since it's been scientifically proven many times that vaccines prevent the emergence of disease in the community, it follows that personal freedom arguments should be overruled.

 

[nicolee]

My thoughts/questions - this may be a dumb question, but if the majority of kids are vaccinated, how are the ones who aren't putting other kids at risk? Aren't the only ones at risk those that willfully chose not to be vaccinated? Like if 95 kids are vacinnated against the measels, and 5 chose not to get the vaccine, then one of the 5 gets measles, wouldn't the 95 kids be safe and the only ones at risk 4 other non-vacinnated ones?

These parents that claim religious beliefs about why they refuse to vacinatte - do they still go ahead and give their kid penicillin when they get an ear infection? I just think there's got to be a lot of hypocrisy in making such a claim and I don't think I could lie about something like that (lying about my religious beliefs - just seems way too wrong to me). Personally, I think I'd just send my kids to a private school or homeschool before I'd lie for 12 years like that.

I vacinnated my kids, but I do understand both sides of the debate. Until they can fully explain the reasons behind the increase in autism diagnoses in recent years, I can see why people are nervous.

Sorry but this is a very dangerous thing to say. The study claiming that vaccines cause autism has been completely, unequivocally refuted by doctors and researchers and there is no other accepted evidence that shows a link. The author of the original study had multiple conflicts of interest that swayed his views – he was basically paid to say those things (Google him – Andrew Wakefield).

The reason behind the increased number of autism diagnoses is most likely just that – increased diagnoses... People who 20 years ago might have just been written off as 'weird' are now being diagnosed as on the spectrum more often. We know more about the condition and we diagnose it more often. That's basically it.

 

[njallday]

The legislature is the same in all 50 states.

A lot of parents are against it thanks to Jenny McCarthy and the Wakefield study. Turns out her child never even had autism and all (or possibly all but one, drawing a blank and don't feel like researching this AM) of the children in the Wakefield trial were never diagnosed as on the spectrum by a doctor. Wakefield retracted his entire study, but the news doesn't tell you that. Unfortunately, the general public doesn't really know that, and all they remember is the link to autism. It was scientifically proven to be false numerous times. Thanks to the Disney measles outbreak, MMR vaccine is now a hot commodity and is in very low supply in the country because all those anti-vaccine people are lining up to get it. interesting how that works.

My bachelors degree is in Public Health (5000% pro vaccinations) and I'm currently in a chiropractic program (some very passionate protestors, not all) so I've gotten to hear and see a lot of opinions and gather a lot of research.

In a perfect world, a child would not be given 5 or 6 vaccines at one time at their checkups. They should be staggered but doctors and the CDC recommend doing it like that because the American population is lazy. They do not believe a parent will really come every week or whatever the case may be to get each vaccine and its subsequent boosters at the appropriate time, so instead they overload the system. That's my only complaint, and as a parent I do have the right to change the vaccination schedule, and I will. Otherwise I am pro-vaccine with the exception of Gardasil because I was almost hospitalized for that one. twice.

 

[CheerBank]

I believe as a parent you have the right to refuse to vaccinate your child. I also believe that the government has the right to protect other children and people with compromised immune systems from your stupidity and therefore not allow you to bring your child into the general population as well. Which means no school and no Disney. Keep your unvaccinated children at home and have them interact with other children of like minded parents. Build a commune where you and your unvaccinated offspring can live in peace and not infect people who cannot get vaccinated although they would very much like to. The mere fact that polio has resurfaced is appalling.

Vaccine-Preventable Diseases Emerging Thanks to Anti-Vaxxers

 

[nicolee]

The legislature is the same in all 50 states.

A lot of parents are against it thanks to Jenny McCarthy and the Wakefield study. Turns out her child never even had autism and all (or possibly all but one, drawing a blank and don't feel like researching this AM) of the children in the Wakefield trial were never diagnosed as on the spectrum by a doctor. Wakefield retracted his entire study, but the news doesn't tell you that. Unfortunately, the general public doesn't really know that, and all they remember is the link to autism. It was scientifically proven to be false numerous times.

Agreed – the Wakefield study is literally like an instruction booklet on how not to do medical research.

• multiple children in the study were recruited by a lawyer preparing a lawsuit against the measles/mumps/rubella vaccine manufacturer
• Wakefield got like $600,000 from the lawyers for doing the study
• he had applied for a patent for an alternative to the vaccine in the study
• he was accused of subjecting children in the study to invasive and unnecessary tests to manipulate their behavior
• almost all of the scientific samples he used to detect measles were contaminated

Basically it was one of the biggest, most disgusting frauds ever in medicine. The media coverage, and the fact that people still use this research without admitting that it was refuted and retracted, leads people to believe that there's some truth in it.

 

[Eyes On The Prize]

I think another part of the importance of vaccinations is because it keeps the numbers of the cases down, it decreases the opportunity for these deadly diseases to mutate. Once they mutate, your potential for an outbreak increases - even among the vaccinated. Then things could really get dangerous.

 

[Cheerfun2]

Another huge group of people who are put at risk by the unvaccinated are babies too young to be vaccinated. I am sorry, this might sound callous...but in general I don't give a fig what decisions parents may make for their own children as long as it doesn't impact mine. But I can guarantee you I would be out for blood if someone else's poor decision caused my 6 week old to contract whooping cough or any other of these dread diseases that used to routinely kill children. Out.For.Blood.
Good luck with your paper!

 

[SheCheers]

The problem is that people can use a waiver of religious beliefs (in every state they can do this) to get around the law. By stating that vaccines are against their religious beliefs, they can still put their kids in public schools, even without vaccinations.

Not all states have a religious exemption (Mississippi does not, there may be more that don't). All states have a medical exemption (as they should, if there is a medical reason you can't get vaccinated, then you shouldn't). Many states also allow a philosophical exemption.

I believe as a parent you have the right to refuse to vaccinate your child. I also believe that the government has the right to protect other children and people with compromised immune systems from your stupidity and therefore not allow you to bring your child into the general population as well. Which means no school and no Disney. Keep your unvaccinated children at home and have them interact with other children of like minded parents. Build a commune where you and your unvaccinated offspring can live in peace and not infect people who cannot get vaccinated although they would very much like to. The mere fact that polio has resurfaced is appalling.

Vaccine-Preventable Diseases Emerging Thanks to Anti-Vaxxers

Stupidity is quite harsh. The people I know who have chosen not to vaccinate have done their research and/or have already had a child who was harmed in some way because they blindly followed the vaccine schedule. Most people who don't vaccinate fully, actually DO eventually fully vaccinate their children, just on a delayed or more spread out schedule. Most people have the sense to understand that a 2 month old's 10-15lb body and immune system cannot really be expected to handle an onslaught of over 4 vaccines with all their additives and preservatives that actually cause them to carry quite a risk.

Last week, one of the people in a group I'm in told us that he had mumps and would be out of the college for the rest of the year and could possibly be a result of him not getting vaccinated as a child. I have worked with him for the past 8 weeks, twice a week for two hours in a small room with little fresh air circulation. Once he told us I had to go check my immunisation records to make sure I have had my two doses. Even with the proper vaccination there is still a 10% chance you can get mumps if you've been in close contact with a person who got it while they were contagious (which I was).

I honestly don't think this was fair to me. Not vaccinating your children doesn't just impact your child, it can impact anyone they come in contact with. This was three weeks before my exams so it was a small bit of added stress and worry that I just didn't need.

The next time you go get shots, read the insert and the risks that are associated with it. It's just as "unfair" to force that risk on someone to protect someone else. If vaccines were 100% safe and effective, I could understand the argument that everyone should get them. But the long term effects of injecting not only an inactivated viruses or dead bacteria, but aluminum, thimerosoal, foreign DNA, amongst other things that I cannot spell or pronounce, have never been studied or confirmed safe. And if you do have a horrible reaction to a shot, you're not really protected. The law is in favor of the dr and manufacturer.

The pharmaceutical industry is like the USASF/Varisty of cheer...too much politics and too much money to just think they have the worlds best interest at heart, IMHO. So you can only really look out for yourself and make your own decisions. If you're really that concerned over the TINY population of unvaccinated kids running around, then you might want to live in a bubble. You're 1000x more likely to die in a car accident, so you might not want to even get in a vehicle, there are some REALLY crazy drivers out there!

But really, it's a risk weighing situation. There is a risk on either side. It is everyone's right to weigh those risks.

People who don't eat right and don't exercise are also more likely to get sick. Should we force a certain diet and exercise regimen on them?

Handwashing is the #1 way to prevent illness, should we require every american to wash their hands every few hours?