Parents who don't vaccinate their children should be liable/sued...

[Itsychik]

... if their child gets anyone else sick.

That's what a friend said to me this morning, and sent me this link:

https://www.slate.com/articles/news...t_vaccinate_their_kids_should_be_sued_or.html

I think the article is really strongly worded (and maybe offensive to some) but I thought some of the information it presented was really interesting (although I disagree with much of it as well--I DON'T think anyone should be sued or that any government should be able to make these choices for people).

Just thought I'd share!

 

[MrsWatson]

Haven't read the article, but I know someone whose daughter has a form of arthiritis, and can't be vacinated due to the medication she takes, which means in turn, she can't be around anyone who hasn't been vacinated either.

 

[Nat0619]

Haven't read the article but this seems harsh. Ciara is up to date with vaccinations and I will continue to have her vaccinated, but I think it's a parent's choice, as is anything else.

 

[PepsiChic]

I'll be honest, if the scenerio happened as suggested...someone brought their unvaccinated 4 year old into day care where my 1 year old is, and they had contracted measles and passed it to my child...I would be suing them for the medical bills.

i dont think its fair to endanger someone elses younger child that way if they arent willing to accept there may be consequences for not vaccinating their child and allowing them to be ain a day care with vulnerable children.

If someone chooses not to vaccinate their child, thats completely in their right to do so...but if they put my child at risk and something happens directly linked to that, then they need to be responsible for the consequence caused by their choice.

 

[Starry Night]

It's tough. I'm very much pro-vaccination and I would definitely not want any of my children who are too young to the vaccine to be exposed to non-vaccinated children. I don't want to be paranoid but if I hear of an outbreak, my kids are going to stay away until they're vaccinated.

My friend used to live in a small town that had a high population of religious folks who thought vaccinations were evil. Their unvaccinated population was high enough that pregnant women outside of their religion were having babies with birth defects because of rubella outbreaks. Those poor babies and their mothers had all choice taken away from them. Stuff like that makes me upset.

But any laws that would force people to take them can get sticky. Like, would a doctor have to sign a certificate that says a child should not be getting a vaccine? Which vaccines would be mandatory, which would be optional? What if a first child had a bad reaction and the mom is too scared to even try with the second? I'm just glad I don't have to make the rules.

 

[bubbles123]

Very hard. Non vaxers frustrate me but it's their right to not vax if they wish and I would defend that right. However I do think it is a selfish choice and would be open to non vaxers being blocked from general state education to protect others (with the exception of medical reasons to not vax). I'm in the UK, so here they could set up their own free school and get state funding or home educate if they wish, thus avoiding much contact with other kids.

 

[Destiny08]

i agree. its tough...but i definitely dont want my daughter exposed to anything that could harm her just cos someone else doesnt want to vaccinate their child...i think non vaccinated children should be excluded from state or public education to keep other kids safe. but in order to reinforce that, it would have to be considered at least criminal negligence if your child is found to be the source because they arent vaccinated. otherwise what stops them simply...lying?

 

[kit10grl]

Very hard. Non vaxers frustrate me but it's their right to not vax if they wish and I would defend that right. However I do think it is a selfish choice and would be open to non vaxers being blocked from general state education to protect others (with the exception of medical reasons to not vax). I'm in the UK, so here they could set up their own free school and get state funding or home educate if they wish, thus avoiding much contact with other kids.

i agree. its tough...but i definitely dont want my daughter exposed to anything that could harm her just cos someone else doesnt want to vaccinate their child...i think non vaccinated children should be excluded from state or public education to keep other kids safe. but in order to reinforce that, it would have to be considered at least criminal negligence if your child is found to be the source because they arent vaccinated. otherwise what stops them simply...lying?

Very strong views. don't get me wrong you are totally entitled to your opinion but excluding a child from schools because of a decision they aren't making themselves seems unfair to me.

My eldest had all his vaccines on schedule DD has immunology issues, she isn't responding correctly so far to her vaccines and so we are having to delay any live vaccines till we can get a better picture of whats going on. So in the scenario in question my baby would be the one to catch the disease. And because she is in the high risk group for pretty much everything there is a possibility she would die. Its a very scary thought.

I don't have a better solution to offer but something about that doesn't feel right

 

[dan-o]

Hmmm, its not that cut and dried though is it?

Although less likely, vaccinated children can still get and pass on the diseases they are vaccinated against. Each vaccination only gives a certain percentage of immunity.

For instance, I have very low immunity to rubella, despite receiving the vaccine, so I could contract it or pass it on. Should I be sued in that case, as I am a 'liability'?

 

[Ceejay123]

Very hard. Non vaxers frustrate me but it's their right to not vax if they wish and I would defend that right. However I do think it is a selfish choice and would be open to non vaxers being blocked from general state education to protect others (with the exception of medical reasons to not vax). I'm in the UK, so here they could set up their own free school and get state funding or home educate if they wish, thus avoiding much contact with other kids.

i agree. its tough...but i definitely dont want my daughter exposed to anything that could harm her just cos someone else doesnt want to vaccinate their child...i think non vaccinated children should be excluded from state or public education to keep other kids safe. but in order to reinforce that, it would have to be considered at least criminal negligence if your child is found to be the source because they arent vaccinated. otherwise what stops them simply...lying?

Very strong views. don't get me wrong you are totally entitled to your opinion but excluding a child from schools because of a decision they aren't making themselves seems unfair to me.

My eldest had all his vaccines on schedule DD has immunology issues, she isn't responding correctly so far to her vaccines and so we are having to delay any live vaccines till we can get a better picture of whats going on. So in the scenario in question my baby would be the one to catch the disease. And because she is in the high risk group for pretty much everything there is a possibility she would die. Its a very scary thought.

I don't have a better solution to offer but something about that doesn't feel right

Completely this... X

 

[sequeena]

It's a tough one for sure. LO is up to date with his vaccinations and actually had 2 MMRs because there was a massive measles outbreak where I live (and to a lesser extent, rubella). There was deaths because of it. Around 1000 parents in the area had not vaccinated, not all because of illnesses, family conditions/reactions to vaccinations etc. That did annoy me as we were in a packed hospital for over 3 hours waiting... but I'm over it now

I do my best to protect my son and those vulnerable children who need protecting because they cannot have it. Even those where the parents have decided for whatever reason to not do it (not because of medical issues). I would still let T play with unvaccinated children because really I don't have a choice I can't go up to parents and demand their children's medical records We do what we do for our kids because it's what we think is best.

 

[special_kala]

Vaccinated children still pass on diseases to non vaccinated so how would they be able to find the source?

 

[feedindy]

Vaccinated children still pass on diseases to non vaccinated so how would they be able to find the source?

They have ways of testing who is epidemiologically the source of an outbreak. That's how they try to find patient zero.

 

[feedindy]

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/top-20-questions-about-vaccination

this is a nice source of information


The thing that bothers me is the people who are nuts and don't vaccinate for no reason and they think vaccines are some sort of government conspiracy. I totally understand not vaccinated for a medical reason.

 

[MommyJogger]

I'm generally pro-vax and we selectively vaccinate (no chicken pox and no flu, delayed schedule 2w-1m between appts, no more than 2 shots at a time). I guess I just don't understand how people can get up in arms about the dangers of not vaccinating to the general population. Unless your area has under an 80% vax rate, the rr of measels and pertussis in a unvaccinated child, for instance, is very close to the rr of SIDS in non-breastfed children.
I'm of the opinion that it's publicly responsible to vaccinate if the child is low-risk for reaction and there hasn't been a vax rxn in the immediate family, but I also think it's important to keep comparable risk in mind when you're deciding whether it's something to be upset or vocal about. The same people who are vocally pro-vax-segregation also tend to be vocally pro-choice when it comes to infant feeding method.

 

[JASMAK]

I dont want my kids around non vaccers, but I dont think I would sue....I mean, how could you sue? How do you know for CERTAIN it was that child that made your child sick. But, if there was someway to prove that, and my child died....yes, of course, I think....

 

[JASMAK]

I'm generally pro-vax and we selectively vaccinate (no chicken pox and no flu, delayed schedule 2w-1m between appts, no more than 2 shots at a time). I guess I just don't understand how people can get up in arms about the dangers of not vaccinating to the general population. Unless your area has under an 80% vax rate, the rr of measels and pertussis in a unvaccinated child, for instance, is very close to the rr of SIDS in non-breastfed children.
I'm of the opinion that it's publicly responsible to vaccinate if the child is low-risk for reaction and there hasn't been a vax rxn in the immediate family, but I also think it's important to keep comparable risk in mind when you're deciding whether it's something to be upset or vocal about. The same people who are vocally pro-vax-segregation also tend to be vocally pro-choice when it comes to infant feeding method.

We arent talking about methods of feeding.

 

[pinklightbulb]

My sons aren't done and I highly doubt the government here would be wasting money they haven't got trying to prove they were the source of any outbreak around here. However, Kevin Rudd (PM at present, but also candidate to stay on when the election happens shortly) is trying to cut benefits to those who don't vax their kids. Clearly we are living in Big Brother's house, and here I thought we were in a free country.

Ah. Yes. The article. Again, imposing on basic human rights-- the right to choose, as well as censorship of the non-vaxing community, no doubt with a bunch of "facts" thrown in to appease those who think not vaxing is the single most evil thing on Earth.

Sigh. Next!

 

[MommyJogger]

I'm generally pro-vax and we selectively vaccinate (no chicken pox and no flu, delayed schedule 2w-1m between appts, no more than 2 shots at a time). I guess I just don't understand how people can get up in arms about the dangers of not vaccinating to the general population. Unless your area has under an 80% vax rate, the rr of measels and pertussis in a unvaccinated child, for instance, is very close to the rr of SIDS in non-breastfed children.
I'm of the opinion that it's publicly responsible to vaccinate if the child is low-risk for reaction and there hasn't been a vax rxn in the immediate family, but I also think it's important to keep comparable risk in mind when you're deciding whether it's something to be upset or vocal about. The same people who are vocally pro-vax-segregation also tend to be vocally pro-choice when it comes to infant feeding method.

We arent talking about methods of feeding.

I wasn't trying to change the subject. Just trying to put it in a perspective that would frame the actual level of risk in a way we're all familiar with.

 

[deafgal]

Yes very harsh and they can not really prove it that they got it from them. As far as I am concern, they could got it from unvaccinated babies or those whose vaccination that didn't work for them for whatever reasons. Are they going to sue them too?