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

[SoulTax]

STS

The benefits of vaccination far outweigh the possible harms that can be caused. If 1 to 4 in a million could become deaf, fall into a coma or have brain damage (This is giving them the benefit of the doubt that all of these are in fact caused by the vaccination and not simply a coincidence) that pales in comparison to:

Between the years 1987 and 2000, the case fatality rate across the United States was 3 measles-attributable deaths per 1000 cases, or 0.3%.

That is deaths; not deafness, coma or brain damage that we cannot reliably attribute to the vaccination anyway. This is also only Measles. Here are some of the complications after contracting measles:

The vast majority of patients survive measles, though in some cases complications may occur, which may include bronchitis, and – in about 1 in 100,000 cases[52] – panencephalitis, which is usually fatal.[5] The patient may spread the disease to an immunocompromised patient, for whom the risk of death is much higher, due to complications such as giant cell pneumonia. Acute measles encephalitis is another serious risk of measles virus infection. It typically occurs two days to one week after the breakout of the measles exanthem and begins with very high fever, severe headache, convulsions and altered mentation. A patient may become comatose, and death or brain injury may occur.

So the very same adverse side effects of the disease itself, are reported in very rare cases from the vaccination. But the chances are higher from the disease than from the vaccination.

Here is Mumps:

Mumps viral infections in adolescent and adult males carry an up to 30% risk that the testes may become infected (orchitis or epididymitis), which can be quite painful; about half of these infections result in testicular atrophy, and in rare cases sterility can follow.[32]
Spontaneous abortion in about 27% of cases during the first trimester of pregnancy.[32]
Mild forms of meningitis in up to 10% of cases[32] (40% of cases occur without parotid swelling)
Oophoritis (inflammation of ovaries) in about 5% of adolescent and adult females,[32] but fertility is affected in almost half of these 5%.
Pancreatitis in about 4% of cases, manifesting as abdominal pain and vomiting
Encephalitis (very rare, and fatal in about 1% of the cases when it occurs)[32]
Profound (91 dB or more) but rare sensorineural hearing loss, uni- or bilateral. Acute unilateral deafness occurs in about 0.005% of cases

1 in 1000 kids that get measles will die in well nourished, well cared for society. Those are the best odds and only apply to a small global demographic. If everyone today, decided to stop vaccinations then in 2 generations we would have death rates from these diseases, that far exceed the sever complications list and rate of the vaccine.

So sure, you can be afraid of the risks in vaccinations. But the risks of non-vaccination are scarier. And if your child ends up being one of the extreme unlucky few that end up in a coma, or with brain damage from the vaccination. Then it is safe to say (Seeing as these are the same severe complications that you can get from the disease itself) that if the child got that from an essentially weakened husk of a viral version of Measles, that they most certainly would have gotten the same or worse from the disease itself.

We play the odds, the odds are that non vaccination hurts more than vaccination. So by not vaccinating, you are choosing the higher risk option and so should be held accountable if any of those risks come to fruition.

I don't believe that charging the parents criminally is a reasonable thing to do. But to charge them from a financial point of view, hell yes, if they can prove that the virus was contracted by contact with the non-vaccinated child; and that child had no medical reason for not receiving the vaccination.

 

[porchrat]

To the OP, those that don't vaccinate should be held accountable.

This of course is assuming they have the opportunity to vaccinate their child and refuse it. I'm not advocating penalties against people who are socioeconomically or logistically unable to get the vaccination.

 

[STS]

STS

The benefits of vaccination far outweigh the possible harms that can be caused. If 1 to 4 in a million could become deaf, fall into a coma or have brain damage (This is giving them the benefit of the doubt that all of these are in fact caused by the vaccination and not simply a coincidence) that pales in comparison to:


That is deaths; not deafness, coma or brain damage that we cannot reliably attribute to the vaccination anyway.

So sure, you can be afraid of the risks in vaccinations. But the risks of non-vaccination are scarier. And if your child ends up being one of the extreme unlucky few that end up in a coma, or with brain damage from the vaccination. Then it is safe to say (Seeing as these are the same severe complications that you can get from the disease itself) that if the child got that from an essentially weakened husk of a viral version of Measles, that they most certainly would have gotten the same or worse from the disease itself.

We play the odds, the odds are that non vaccination hurts more than vaccination. So by not vaccinating, you are choosing the higher risk option and so should be held accountable if any of those risks come to fruition.

I don't believe that charging the parents criminally is a reasonable thing to do. But to charge them from a financial point of view, hell yes, if they can prove that the virus was contracted by contact with the non-vaccinated child; and that child had no medical reason for not receiving the vaccination.

this is what i stated earlier:

You can argue that the risk of getting these disease are greater than the actual damage done by a vaccine, but there is no guarantee that they will ever encounter the disease or pick it up in their life time.

I can approach 10 people, tell them i have a vaccine for measles, and 1 in the 10 kids die after having it administered to them. in this case, i think it is important that it was the parents decision, and i expect more from the pro-vaccination people than "oh well, oops."

i am pro-vaccination, but show a little humanity to EVERYONE

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

at the time i had other members in mind however

 

[OrbitalDawn]

To the OP, those that don't vaccinate should be held accountable.

This of course is assuming they have the opportunity to vaccinate their child and refuse it. I'm not advocating penalties against people who are socioeconomically or logistically unable to get the vaccination.

Held accountable in what way? Criminally charged?

 

[porchrat]

Held accountable in what way? Criminally charged?

I don't necessarily have a problem with it being a criminal offence. Though I don't know enough about our legal system to have a full appreciation of what that entails beyond state prosecution and a potential prison term.

At the end of the day refusing vaccinations for your child places others at risk. The minute that happens I believe the state is obligated to intervene.

All competent adults are capable of understanding the very clear benefits of vaccination, not just to their child but to the world's population at large.

 

[SoulTax]

this is what i stated earlier:

You can argue that the risk of getting these disease are greater than the actual damage done by a vaccine, but there is no guarantee that they will ever encounter the disease or pick it up in their life time.

I can approach 10 people, tell them i have a vaccine for measles, and 1 in the 10 kids die after having it administered to them. in this case, i think it is important that it was the parents decision, and i expect more from the pro-vaccination people than "oh well, oops."

i am pro-vaccination, but show a little humanity to EVERYONE

I think you need to be honest to both sides of the argument though. If you went up to the parents of 1 million children and told them that you have a vaccine for measles. This vaccine could permanently harm 1 to 4 of those 1 million children perhaps 1 being a death, the other 3 being brain damage or deafness.
Then went on to explain that the mortality rate of measles is between 0.1% (1 in 1000) and 30% depending on various nutritional and healthcare factors. That even of those 999 that might survive in the best case scenario, many could end up with those same adverse side effects of brain damage or deafness. That there is a chance that they will not ever come into contact with that disease in their entire life. But if they do, their odds of adverse consequences is 1000 - 300 000 times more likely depending on those nutritional or healthcare factors laid out earlier.

Then to top it all off, for every single child that does not get the vaccination, you increase the likelihood that this disease might be contracted by your child and all children. So by refusing based on the 0.0001% to 0.0004% chance that your child will have irreversible damage done to it. You increase the odds of that disease getting a stronger foothold again.

I think that if all of these are laid out to a parent, they will be able to look at the odds and easily choose the vaccination route. But sensationalisation of the topic; like presenting the comparatively minor occurrences of adverse effects of the vaccination (Sometimes even lying, like in the case of Autism), without presenting the adverse effects of not getting the vaccination; is irresponsible and should definitely be met by more than an, "oh well, oops" as well.

 

[STS]

I think you need to be honest to both sides of the argument though. If you went up to the parents of 1 million children and told them that you have a vaccine for measles. This vaccine could permanently harm 1 to 4 of those 1 million children perhaps 1 being a death, the other 3 being brain damage or deafness.
Then went on to explain that the mortality rate of measles is between 0.1% (1 in 1000) and 30% depending on various nutritional and healthcare factors. That even of those 999 that might survive in the best case scenario, many could end up with those same adverse side effects of brain damage or deafness. That there is a chance that they will not ever come into contact with that disease in their entire life. But if they do, their odds of adverse consequences is 1000 - 300 000 times more likely depending on those nutritional or healthcare factors laid out earlier.

Then to top it all off, for every single child that does not get the vaccination, you increase the likelihood that this disease might be contracted by your child and all children. So by refusing based on the 0.0001% to 0.0004% chance that your child will have irreversible damage done to it. You increase the odds of that disease getting a stronger foothold again.

I think that if all of these are laid out to a parent, they will be able to look at the odds and easily choose the vaccination route. But sensationalisation of the topic; like presenting the comparatively minor occurrences of adverse effects of the vaccination (Sometimes even lying, like in the case of Autism), without presenting the adverse effects of not getting the vaccination; is irresponsible and should definitely be met by more than an, "oh well, oops" as well.

I agree with you fully, i just don't like having an innocent death dismissed as hogwash when the manufacturers of the vaccines admit to it themselves(other thread)

 

[MrGray]

STS

The benefits of vaccination far outweigh the possible harms that can be caused. If 1 to 4 in a million could become deaf, fall into a coma or have brain damage (This is giving them the benefit of the doubt that all of these are in fact caused by the vaccination and not simply a coincidence) that pales in comparison to:

Valid points - for SOME vaccinations. What about diseases where the mortality rate is probably no worse than that of the common flu? And the rates of serious complications for many vaccines is sometimes much higher than 1 to 4 in a million - even as high as 1/10000.

Not all vaccines are the same and neither are the diseases. You are an idiot if you refuse to vaccinate your kid for polio, but for something like chicken pox, I'm really not so sure that's necessary? I seem to remember when I was a kid pretty much everyone had a week or two off from school for chicken pox sooner or later, none the worse for it. I'd rather err on the side of not sticking something unnatural into your kids system, unless, as you point out, the benefits clearly outweigh the downside.

The latest controversy is around Gardasil, an HPV (STD) vaccine which is increasingly being administered overseas to young girls (and increasingly boys). There seems to be a huge debate about whether it causes infertility and various other side effects, and whether it is even all that effective to begin with.

All I'm saying is be aware, and prudent, especially with the newer vaccines that haven't got a long history.

 

[noxibox]

In my opinion the other parent's knew the risk in sending their kid to a creche that has unvaccinated children there (or could have reasonably be expected to know), the creche itself also took the risk of allowing unvaccinated children and vaccinated children together.

The daycare shouldn't even take any children who are not vaccinated without a valid medical reason.

How then do we hold only the parents of the unvaccinated responsible (when they just didn't want their child to be that small % that has complications, do you see the parents only want to keep their child safe, however silly it might be) when there are at least another two parties who allowed this to happen? Do you see how now we can start finding almost anyone responsible?

The parents should have a duty of disclosure and this information should then be communicated to all other parents.

I do not know the law on whether creche's/schools are allowed to refuse entry to non-vaccinated children, so that's another issue to consider.

In the US they can and should unless the parents have a valid reason. Fear of extremely rare consequences shouldn't be considered a valid reason. Fear of fantasy dangers is definitely not a reason.

Yeah, I agree with that, I think. You'd need a leg to stand on if you want to prosecute someone for criminal negligence.

Crimes should really only involve intent to do harm.

This is part of where it gets tricky. How can it be just to dump all that responsibility (which the person supposedly neglected) on one person? You can't blame one person for a diphtheria outbreak, for example. But what are you going to do, charge every parent that didn't have their child vaccinated, regardless of their known contact with others?

The civil route is better. It is quite reasonable for these negligent parents to have to pay for the damage they cause.

Valid points - for SOME vaccinations. What about diseases where the mortality rate is probably no worse than that of the common flu? And the rates of serious complications for many vaccines is sometimes much higher than 1 to 4 in a million - even as high as 1/10000.

Not all vaccines are the same and neither are the diseases. You are an idiot if you refuse to vaccinate your kid for polio, but for something like chicken pox, I'm really not so sure that's necessary? I seem to remember when I was a kid pretty much everyone had a week or two off from school for chicken pox sooner or later, none the worse for it. I'd rather err on the side of not sticking something unnatural into your kids system, unless, as you point out, the benefits clearly outweigh the downside.

All I'm saying is be aware, and prudent, especially with the newer vaccines that haven't got a long history.

And chickenpox kills some children. In addition many other diseases for which there are vaccines can have severe non-fatal consequences.

People's risk assessment of vaccines is all wrong and that is why we have these vaccine panics fuelled by anti-vaccine crackpots with the aid of dumb journalists who have no business writing about anything to do with science (or requires the sort of advanced mathematics typically taught to 8 year olds).

The latest controversy is around Gardasil, an HPV (STD) vaccine which is increasingly being administered overseas to young girls (and increasingly boys). There seems to be a huge debate about whether it causes infertility and various other side effects, and whether it is even all that effective to begin with.

Who is having this debate?