Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
scaryjim
So doctors should have the final word in what treatment a patient receives? Or should individuals be allowed to refuse treatment?
It isn't quite as simple as state-vs-individual in the case of children. I'd normally agree state should never override an individual's choice, but if a parent removes your choice anyway as a child, the point is surely moot...
There is a moral double standard going on here. We quite readily take kids away from parents if dad starts slapping the kids around when he comes home bladdered. Yet we leave them alone if hippy mumsie potentially exposes them and a bunch of other kids to death?
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wasabi
It isn't quite as simple as state-vs-individual in the case of children. I'd normally agree state should never override an individual's choice, but if a parent removes your choice anyway as a child, the point is surely moot...
There is a moral double standard going on here. We quite readily take kids away from parents if dad starts slapping the kids around when he comes home bladdered. Yet we leave them alone if hippy mumsie potentially exposes them and a bunch of other kids to death?
It's not as clear cut with vaccinations as physical abuse from a parent. You're assuming all these vaccinations are safe. Others don't..
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
scaryjim
So doctors should have the final word in what treatment a patient receives? Or should individuals be allowed to refuse treatment?
Because essentially you're saying that parents shouldn't have a choice over the medical treatment of their children, and that's a pretty damn bold statement...
The state should legislate on the most essential vaccinations. One of the most important requirements of parents is to protect the child and maintain their health. Remember that a lot of people like to think they know better, when in reality they don't.
Most parents are intelligent enough to know what the right course of action should be with regards to vaccinations. Your response to my statement implies that I'm referring to medical treatment in general - I'm not. I'm referring solely to a tried and tested method of protecting children and the wider population, which is constantly peer-reviewed and has incredibly far-reaching consequences. I'm talking about parents who might believe that vaccination is not the right choice because they have read a newspaper article, or perhaps a religious belief. In my opinion that is tantamount to desertion of responsibility to the child, or at worst a form of abuse.
Withholding medical treatment is illegal in most instances where a life is directly endangered, yet state-funded prevention of serious illness is optional. You can't expect to be able to educate the most awkward proportion of the population, which is where legislation has to take over.
For me the bigger question (as Saracen has outline above) is how, not why.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shirty
The state should legislate on the most essential vaccinations. One of the most important requirements of parents is to protect the child and maintain their health. Remember that a lot of people like to think they know better, when in reality they don't.
Most parent are intelligent enough to know what the right course of action should be with regards to vaccinations. Your response to my statement implies that I'm referring to medical treatment in general - I'm not. I'm referring solely to a tried and tested method of protecting children and the wider population, which is constantly peer-reviewed and has incredibly far-reaching consequences. I'm talking about parents who might believe that vaccination is not the right choice because they have read a newspaper article, or perhaps a religious belief. In my opinion that is tantamount to desertion of responsibility to the child, or at worst a form of abuse.
Withholding medical treatment is illegal in most instances where a life is directly endangered, yet state-funded prevention of serious illness is optional. You can't expect to be able to educate the most awkward proportion of the population, which is where legislation has to take over.
For me the bigger question (as Saracen has outline above) is how, not why.
The government are supposed to be public servants. Not slave owners. This isn't supposed to be Nazi Germany. What would you like them to do if parents refuse vaccinations for their children? Send them to concentration camps and gas them to death? Line them up and shoot them in the head?
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
That's a touch overzealous. Also Godwin's law.
Let's flip it: if you chose not to get your child vaccinated for some reason, and then they went on to die from complications arising from a disease that would otherwise have been treatable or preventable, how would you feel? Would it still seem like you made the right choice?
Certain rules are mandated by the state to reduce risk to the general population, such as speed limits. People can choose to ignore them of course, but they would then be liable to prosecution and legal process.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shirty
That's a touch overzealous. Also Godwin's law.
And "ZaO's Law" says that someone will inevitably come up with something so anti human, that a response referring to Hitler is extremely likely.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
I struggle to see how this proposal would have anything other than a positive impact on your life, the life of your children, and the wider population as a whole.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
My duty is to protect my son - he was old enough to realise about the jabs this time around and he was distraught - he's also got bruises on his legs from them - do I feel awful? Hell yes.
Do I regret it? No. He needs to be safe. I cannot protect him from life or the world but I can make sure he will be safer.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shirty
I struggle to see how this proposal would have anything other than a positive impact on your life, the life of your children, and the wider population as a whole.
In your view of things, sure. But not others. It's about choice my friend. There are lots of people who do not feel the same as you. And likewise, lots of people who do, I'm sure.
Who can prove these vaccinations are safe and don't cause any long term issues? Can you? There are studies arguing both sides. You want people to accept such things from a Corporation that let us do nothing more than vote for our favourite colour once in a while? Forgive me for saying you sounded a bit Nazi. But we did not setup a Government to forcefully inject our children's bodies and minds with chemicals we do not understand.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
I understand, and completely respect your viewpoint - indeed up until just over two years ago I would have typed a very similar argument. But since having a child, whilst my own viewpoints haven't changed I have been exposed to a number of other parents whose own opinions and values should be, on a wide variety of social, moral and health grounds.
Whilst I am a liberal and would always prefer to advocate choice for the masses, as I've grown older I've seen another side to the coin. People are stupid. Obviously not all people, nor even necessarily the majority. But a huge swathe of our population simply aren't capable of making rational, well thought out decisions - that is where the leadership of the country has to step in and coerce certain actions. If we are going to give all heterosexual couples the birthright to have their own children, then we have a duty as a society to look out for those who are misguided, stubborn or just plain dangerous. It's what social services was born from.
My own opinions on vaccination are not scientific but they are empirical. Just about everyone I know has been though the standard suite of vaccinations, and nobody I know or am aware of has suffered any medium to long term adverse effects. Scientific studies overwhelmingly corroborate this. Much in the same way as we are all happy to put a smartphone next to our brain or reproductive organs "because nobody's proved it's not safe," I am happy to put my trust in the essential eradication of childhood killers like polio and measles by science, because nobody has ever produced widely accepted evidence to the contrary.
I just can't stand to see the suffering of children such as we saw in Wales last month, all because ill informed people have a choice. I don't hold the answers of course, just a tiny voice in the wider debate.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ZaO
I'll admit I haven't read any of the other posts in this thread.
How about doing that maybe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ZaO
So I assume the conversation has evolved considerably. But to this - are you serious!? How ignorant. You would like people to be prosecuted for not letting the government inject their kids with chemicals that they/you don't understand? How do people get so narrow minded.. It's not abuse. Your child, your choice. How the hell do you even know you can trust these drugs.
We don't understand how Dutch Original Organic Busicuits effect your child any more than we full understand how would Monster Munch.
We are talking about peer reviewed science here. Not hunches. There isn't any trust needed. We have imperical evidence. That is the difference.
It is not 'your child, your choice' there is plenty of legal precident to overruling parents.
It isn't about narrowmindedness, it is about the greater good. If we want hurd immunity we need to ensure that the vulnerable are protected, those who for medical reasons its unwise to vacinate. This can only be done if the healthy are.
It comes to a form of the prisoners dilema, overall everyone needs to co-operate, but it is in the indeviduals interest to deceive.
I suggest we fix that.
Oh I forgot the name calling, erm, "thicko luddite".
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Big Brother vs Retarded Morons. Strange - they're usually great bedfellows too.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shirty
I understand, and completely respect your viewpoint - indeed up until just over two years ago I would have typed a very similar argument. But since having a child, whilst my own viewpoints haven't changed I have been exposed to a number of other parents whose own opinions and values should be, on a wide variety of social, moral and health grounds.
Whilst I am a liberal and would always prefer to advocate choice for the masses, as I've grown older I've seen another side to the coin. People are stupid. Obviously not all people, nor even necessarily the majority. But a huge swathe of our population simply aren't capable of making rational, well thought out decisions - that is where the leadership of the country has to step in and coerce certain actions. If we are going to give all heterosexual couples the birthright to have their own children, then we have a duty as a society to look out for those who are misguided, stubborn or just plain dangerous. It's what social services was born from.
My own opinions on vaccination are not scientific but they are empirical. Just about everyone I know has been though the standard suite of vaccinations, and nobody I know or am aware of has suffered any medium to long term adverse effects. Scientific studies overwhelmingly corroborate this. Much in the same way as we are all happy to put a smartphone next to our brain or reproductive organs "because nobody's proved it's not safe," I am happy to put my trust in the essential eradication of childhood killers like polio and measles by science, because nobody has ever produced widely accepted evidence to the contrary.
I just can't stand to see the suffering of children such as we saw in Wales last month, all because ill informed people have a choice. I don't hold the answers of course, just a tiny voice in the wider debate.
I think a lot of people just grow up believing all the things their parents believed. Never evolving or challenging those beliefs. I'm not sure how many people are just stupid, but narrow minded, and unwilling to consider anything other than what they believe. After having great arguments made against me at times growing up, when I would just shove my opinion out there like Hitler ;P I realized that it's really hard to be sure of anything. And even when you think you have a great argument sussed - someone can come along and throw a spanner into the works. I consider myself to be very open minded these days. Yet I know there is always room for improvement, always.
There are definitely some kids out there being abused, and people wanting to help and protect them is good. It's a good sign that the human race is still somewhat functioning with a purpose other than greed. But I'm pretty sure you or I don't understand a lot about these vaccinations. So it's not right to force them on people. Even if there was amazing evidence that they are all good. Still no. We'll be having this discussion about putting micro chips in us before long. Because it's for our "safety". See if you still feel the same.
Also, how do you know that no one has suffered side effects? They may work slowly and increase risk of other diseases, and cause weakness in the immune system. They may reduce IQ over time. All we do is take one scientists word for something over another. What's the agenda of the company who the scientist you chose works for? Lots of things to consider..
People are so scared that they just want more and more laws to take away peoples freedoms so they can feel safer. Sadly I notice a lot of people crumbling into this type of behaviour as they get older. As they lose touch with the world and society. All they do is go to work, then lock themselves into their home and let the tv scare them of the world outside. The system loves to use fear to get you to accept/agree to laws that take away your freedom. You may think I'm going a little off course here. But it's all interconnected.
Edit: @TheAnimus
I didn't name call. I didn't mean to offend you. But I don't know how else to say what I wanted to say about how I saw your view in the first post. But when you say "There isn't any trust needed". Speak for yourself. Seriously... What I'm really interested to know from the people with your point of view, is what do you think should be done with the people who don't agree to having their kids injected? Btw - you sound like a government agent.
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Agent
Boom!
Australia has long been known for this kind of draconian policy. The vaccine clinics that I've been to all have special advice for parents that might be moving or returning to Australia.
The Drs. there are advocating that
Quote:
parents who don't vaccinate their children should be forced to produce a conscientious objection form
Yeah, whatever. http://www.../australian-medical-association-calls-for-mandatory-proof-of-vaccination/
There's a lot of misinformation about "vaccines". Note how the industry always refers to all "vaccines" and rarely about specific vaccines.
If you do look at individual vaccines you are able to find all sorts of inconvenient reports, like :-
http://.../the-lead-vaccine-developer-comes-clean-so-she-can-sleep-at-nightq-gardasil-and-cervarix-dont-work-are-dangerous-and-werent-tested.html
You find that the swine flu vaccine (the one that is now banned in many countries because of all the narcolepsy it caused), also caused a load of miscarriages. http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=27973
You find that doctors have been using freedom of information requests to uncover strange things.
http://.../the-vaccine-hoax-is-over-freedom-of-information-act-documents-from-uk-reveal-30-years-of-coverup/
And you'll find that herd immunity is a myth. http://www.../if-you-are-in-support-of-vaccinations/
Re: Should parents be held legally responsible for not vaccinating their children?
No trials? No studies? My son is IN ONE. I have all the background evidence and trials.
I am living proof that you are being ridiculous. Even if I would, as a mother, enrol my child in something as unsafe as you imply, do you honestly think my husband would let me?
You are being ridiculous
