The case for suing parents who don’t vaccinate their kids—or criminally charging them

[BobsLawnService]

As for the autism/MMR link - the doctor who "found" it was proven to be preying on grieving people to make a quick buck. He is pondslime.

 

[HapticSimian]

Everyone is responsible for their own children and no-one else's. You can do what you can to protect them but that's about it. Sooner or later something bad will happen to them and as long as you did what you could and what you thought was right, what more do you want to do? Remember how the pro-vaccine parent feels about vaccination is the same way an anti-vaccine parent feels and as much as you wouldn't want to be forced to do something which is against what you believe, neither would they.

When what I believe can be shown to be verifiably false and stupid I'd most certainly want society to point me in the right direction. Unsubstantiated beliefs are indefensible.

 

[Sinbad]

Everyone is responsible for their own children and no-one else's. You can do what you can to protect them but that's about it. Sooner or later something bad will happen to them and as long as you did what you could and what you thought was right, what more do you want to do? Remember how the pro-vaccine parent feels about vaccination is the same way an anti-vaccine parent feels and as much as you wouldn't want to be forced to do something which is against what you believe, neither would they.

So when a drunk driver mows your kid down, you'll be OK with it because you did what you could?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

They also wouldn't be happy if the child fell down the stairs and died.

You're still not grasping the fact that your decision not to vaccinate has a direct affect on what happens to the children of others. A child falling down the stairs is a red herring.

there are 4 kinds of people in this scenario

1.) Those that do not get vaccinated - they do not get the disease
2.) Those that do not get vaccinated - they do get the disease
3.) Those that do get vaccinated - they do not get the disease
4.) Those that do get vaccinated - they do get the disease

You do not know what category your child will fall into, but it would make sense to put your child in category 3 or 4 to protect them later in life. However, making it COMPULSORY to have your vaccination, no exceptions, is dangerous as every vaccine has it's side effects and odds of actually being useful.

Like all medicine, not all vaccinations are the same and some children cannot have vaccines due to allergies or weakened immune systems. It does not mean that because they do not receive a vaccine, that they are going to die, it simply means that they will not be as resistant to the disease IF it happens.

There are thousands of people who have not been vaccinated and have died, there are also thousands who have not been vaccinated at all and are still fine today

edit: and as before, i do not appreciate people who's counter argument is "well that kid would have died from the disease anyway". wow, really? no ****. thank you for being human. let's kill children en mass sooner

Point being, those that cannot be vaccinated for whatever reason (age, allergy etc.) rely on the herd immunity that comes when as many people as possible get vaccinated. Someone that isn't vaccinated isn't necessarily going to die, but he can be a carrier for the virus that ends up killing someone else.

Did you read the hypothetical scenario in the OP? Someone else's baby dies because the parents of a different kid didn't vaccinate.

To completely go to the extreme end of the spectrum and say 'well we can't be protected from everything, so whatever' or to compare it to car accidents or falling down stairs is woefully negligent.

 

[googoodoll]

So when a drunk driver mows your kid down, you'll be OK with it because you did what you could?

Obviously not. But how could it have been prevented? By banning alcohol? And then chances are he would have been drunk anyway.

 

[Sinbad]

Obviously not. But how could it have been prevented? By banning alcohol? And then chances are he would have been drunk anyway.

By banning drinking and driving - which is already the case. Difference is, in this case you'd have legal recourse for compensation etc.
Both actions (not vaccinating, and drink driving) have possible deadly consequences for others, not just yourself/your child. Why should the legal consequences be different?

 

[googoodoll]

I'm not against vaccination at all. I just don't think its something you can force.

 

[Sinbad]

I'm not against vaccination at all. I just don't think its something you can force.

For sure, but if you decide not to, you should also face the consequences of your decision should someone else be affected.

 

[Stefanmuller]

The day care that we use requires the immunisation records of every child, and wont accept any children who are missing important vaccines. That way other children are protected.

 

[googoodoll]

For sure, but if you decide not to, you should also face the consequences of your decision should someone else be affected.

If they can prove it was my unvaccinated child who spread the disease and if I have no real reason not to have vaccinated the child and also if I had been educated about vaccination and chose not to consider the safety of my child. Then maybe.

 

[Sinbad]

If they can prove it was my unvaccinated child who spread the disease and if I have no real reason not to have vaccinated the child and also if I had been educated about vaccination and chose not to consider the safety of my child. Then maybe.

They can prove it, read the articles. As for the education thing, ignorance has never been a valid legal defence. You have responsibilities as a parent.

 

[googoodoll]

They can prove it, read the articles. As for the education thing, ignorance has never been a valid legal defence. You have responsibilities as a parent.

Just tell that to half the parents of the world.

 

[Sinbad]

Just tell that to half the parents of the world.

So just because they don't bother, you shouldn't need to? I won't go into my views on a parenthood license on this thread

 

[STS]

Point being, those that cannot be vaccinated for whatever reason (age, allergy etc.) rely on the herd immunity that comes when as many people as possible get vaccinated. Someone that isn't vaccinated isn't necessarily going to die, but he can be a carrier for the virus that ends up killing someone else.

Did you read the hypothetical scenario in the OP? Someone else's baby dies because the parents of a different kid didn't vaccinate.

To completely go to the extreme end of the spectrum and say 'well we can't be protected from everything, so whatever' or to compare it to car accidents or falling down stairs is woefully negligent.

In another thread, i've had arguments for making compulsory compared to not taking a vaccine to driving on the pavement and killing people. there are pathetic analogies all around

i just happened to watch the episode with my mom. the episode had to find a twist and a bad guy, and they made the mother that didn't vaccination out to be scum of the earth. i can equally make a tv show and make the atheist the bad guy in the story, the entire episode was an appeal to emotion argument. Hilary Duff(hot hot hot hot hot) was the innocent mother that thought she was the reason for the child's death, and it turns out that it was an unvaccinated kid who had measles. what a twist!

what is ironic, is that the kid COULD have been vaccinated, and still have gotten measles and passed on the measles to the child in any case. but it's easier to sue the mother rather than the school for not sending the child home, or not arresting the mother for not taking the child to the hospital immediately.

we could also make another hypothetical situation, i'll make a Law and Order episode about Polio:

On rare occasions, if a population is seriously under-immunized, an excreted vaccine-virus can continue to circulate for an extended period of time. The longer it is allowed to survive, the more genetic changes it undergoes. In very rare instances, the vaccine-virus can genetically change into a form that can paralyse – this is what is known as a circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV).

In this episode i can have the cleaners sued and the doctors sued for not mentioning the risks to all those involved. Of course this takes a long time to happen, but so does it take for measles to reenter a population

 

[STS]

They can prove it, read the articles. As for the education thing, ignorance has never been a valid legal defence. You have responsibilities as a parent.

The problem is, where does the responsibility end? You must prove that a kid made your kid sick - how do you know that it was not via a proxy? what if the kid made another kid sick, who made YOUR kid sick? and likewise, where did that kid get sick from in the first place to infect the other kids? you're going to go down a long chain.

saying that the kid should have been vaccinated to end the chain kinda falls flat, that a kid that was vaccinated died and the vaccination did nothing. in the show, poverty contributed to the death, not that the disease was not treatable

 

[OrbitalDawn]

In another thread, i've had arguments for making compulsory compared to not taking a vaccine to driving on the pavement and killing people. there are pathetic analogies all around

i just happened to watch the episode with my mom. the episode had to find a twist and a bad guy, and they made the mother that didn't vaccination out to be scum of the earth. i can equally make a tv show and make the atheist the bad guy in the story, the entire episode was an appeal to emotion argument. Hilary Duff(hot hot hot hot hot) was the innocent mother that thought she was the reason for the child's death, and it turns out that it was an unvaccinated kid who had measles. what a twist!

what is ironic, is that the kid COULD have been vaccinated, and still have gotten measles and passed on the measles to the child in any case. but it's easier to sue the mother rather than the school for not sending the child home, or not arresting the mother for not taking the child to the hospital immediately.

You don't need an appeal to emotion. The reality of not vaccinating vs. vaccinating is sufficient.

But what does any of this have to do with my point about herd immunity being the goal?

we could also make another hypothetical situation, i'll make a Law and Order episode about Polio:



In this episode i can have the cleaners sued and the doctors sued for not mentioning the risks to all those involved. Of course this takes a long time to happen, but so does it take for measles to reenter a population

Okay, and? Sounds to me like just another pro-vaccination argument in the end.

 

[D3nz]

The day care that we use requires the immunisation records of every child, and wont accept any children who are missing important vaccines. That way other children are protected.

Which is as it should be. Parents who don't want to vaccinate their children should homeschool them. My son was diagnosed with an auto immune disease when he was a baby and after receiving the MMR vaccine, broke out into a mild case of measles. This doesn't stop me from wanting all children to be vaccinated. IMO parents who don't are selfish.

 

[STS]

You don't need an appeal to emotion. The reality of not vaccinating vs. vaccinating is sufficient.

likewise is the reality of losing a loved one in a "completely safe" environment. society fails people every day.

But what does any of this have to do with my point about herd immunity being the goal?

Okay, and? Sounds to me like just another pro-vaccination argument in the end.

herd immunity at the expense of individual rights is not acceptable. freedom for many by sacrificing the freedom of a few is not acceptable. will parents be liable for every disease their kid spreads? vaccination deaths and side effects can drop dramatically if vaccinations were administered AFTER making sure that they would not provide side effects. it is not that costly to start, but it's more convenient to jab someone and say "let's see how it goes."

vaccinations have completely annihilated diseases - but they have also caused individual misery at the sake of the community when it could have been prevented had people been more careful, taken the proper precautions and been given alternative options.

i am once again PRO-vaccination - but the entire episode was a terrible example. there are better ways of doing both - maintaining freedom AND giving vaccinations in such a way as to lower the chances of bad experiences

 

[STS]

Which is as it should be. Parents who don't want to vaccinate their children should homeschool them. My son was diagnosed with an auto immune disease when he was a baby and after receiving the MMR vaccine, broke out into a mild case of measles. This doesn't stop me from wanting all children to be vaccinated. IMO parents who don't are selfish.

but they could have warned you before harming your child - as medical professionals they're very insensitive to the odds of medication causing side effects.

 

[D3nz]

but they could have warned you before harming your child - as medical professionals they're very insensitive to the odds of medication causing side effects.

Absolutely agree with you there. There were no questions asked about his medical history and back then there wasn't the wealth of information you find on the Internet today so that you can inform yourself.