In an article entitled, PAC Mobilizes to Defend Vaccine Exemptions in Texas, Morgan Smith, a reporter for Texas Tribune covers the anti-vaxxer movement in Texas, detailing the Political Action Committee created in response to filed legislation "taking aim at a provision in state law that allows parents to opt their children out of school immunization requirements". While many parent's hold only their child's interests at heart, the risk that they potentially bring to their children and many others are simply too much of a liability to let stand.
While many could argue this is an issue of parental rights, it is much more reasonable to consider this notion a case against the general welfare of society. Since its discovery, vaccines have been found to be the sole reason for the eradication of many preventable diseases, perhaps the most well known of those being the smallpox vaccine in 1798. Yet this new movement that questions the legitimacy and effectiveness of vaccines has brought back what many once thought a thing of the past into our current society. It is due to this that outbreaks of measles and whooping cough are once again reappearing in areas where parents choose to not vaccinate their children.
Having to file a "conscientious exemption" form to simply not vaccinate should be unacceptable. To be part of a society, there must be conformity to the laws and rules by which it stands. That is to say, if a parent submits that their child be exempt from particular social standards, then they should be willing to take their child out of public institutions if their interests should clash. Certain peanut products are often banned from schools due to allergies, why shouldn't certain children be banned for diseases? Not only should Texas ban vaccine exemptions, there should be federally enforced legislation on the regulation of vaccinating children. This is not a right so much as it is a standard to be met as a member of society.
I'm a strong believer in the concept of individual pursuit of happiness, so long as that happiness doesn't afflict another individual's pursuit. Because of this, there is a plethora of laws and social issues that I disagree with, regardless of their intended effects.
ReplyDeleteRecently, Lienthelion has touched on the relatively new anti-vaxx movement in his post Editorial: PAC Mobilizes to defend Vaccine Exemptions in Texas. Throughout his Editorial, Lien explains the controversial decisions made by the parents involved in the anti-vaxx movement, and concludes that "there should be federally enforced legislation on the regulation of vaccinating children. This is not a right so much as it is a standard to be met as a member of society."
Frankly, I completely agree with Lien. I personally have a family member who has hopped on the anti-vaxx train and while because of that, I understand the concerns of the parents who have made the decision not to vaccinate their children, I still disagree with the decision; and like Lien I disagree with it being a decision left to individual parents. While the participants in this movement clearly want what is best for their children, they selfishly ignore the risk that they impose on other children, and on society as a whole. A trend of this magnitude that risks the welfare of the next generation(s) should not, and cannot be ignored- and while I generally condemn running to the government to solve any issues that would place restrictions on the individual, I feel that the best solution to this issue is a judicial and/or legislative one.
After reading the blog post by Lien Fon Chi, I have to agree with his point in that parents may think that they have their child’s best interest when opting them out if the vaccination and that this can come with severe consequences that will harm the general public. I feel that his by bringing in historical evidence such as how measles and whooping cough have come back supports his argument and shows how dire the situation can be if people continue to opt out of vaccines. I feel that parents should not have the option to opt out of vaccines because of how many places make them mandatory and more importantly schools. Why should children that could be a potential disease threat be allowed to attend the same schools that children with the vaccine? I feel that this would anger many parents if they knew that their children could be in danger of catching what children have. Lien’s comparison of the banning of peanut products to banning children with diseases is a little over the top but it’s not so much that it changes how solid his argument is. I feel that Lien’s conclusion of making getting vaccinations a standard of being a member of society is the single most important point of this blog post. I believe that many would conclude that getting vaccinations to prevent diseases would help the general public overall, and I cannot see as to why anyone would want to opt out of lifesaving vaccines. I believe Lien’s argument is strong, to the historical evidence and the research of increasing diseases, it is hard to find a way in which to form a counterargument.
ReplyDelete