Suing Anti-Vaxxers
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 95
Like Tree53Likes

Thread: Suing Anti-Vaxxers

  1. #1
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default Suing Anti-Vaxxers

    Anti-vaxxers: Why parents who don’t vaccinate their kids should be sued or criminally charged. - Slate Magazine

    What if a mother decided not to vaccinate her daughter for measles, based on rumors that the vaccine causes autism, and her daughter gets the disease at the age of 4 and passes it to a 1-year-old, who is too young for the vaccine, at her day care center. And what if that baby dies?


    That?s the sad scenario, more or less, of a Season 10 episode of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. And it?s the hypothetical case study in a provocative paper in the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics that explores whether there?s a case for holding people legally accountable for the damage they cause by not vaccinating their children. ?One can make a legitimate, state-sanctioned choice not to vaccinate,? the bioethicist Arthur L. Caplan and his co-authors write, ?but that does not protect the person making that choice against the consequences of that choice for others.? Since epidemiologists today can reliably determine the source of a viral infection, the authors argue, a parent who decides not to vaccinate his kid and thus endangers another child is clearly at fault and could be charged with criminally negligent homicide or sued for damages.


    As you?d expect, the growing anti-vaccination movement responded in fury. After Caplan wrote a related post for the Harvard Law Blog, angry comments poured in. ?This article is industry propaganda at its worst,? one commenter declared. Another wrote: ?Caplan would have familiar company in fascist Germany.? The blog eventually shut down the comments for violations of the site?s policies against ?abusive and defamatory language? and the sharing of personal information.


    Here?s why the anti-vaxxers are wrong and Caplan and his co-authors are right to raise the idea of suing or criminally charging them: Parents who choose not to vaccinate their kids for reasons of personal belief pose a serious danger to the public.


    Measles vaccines are about 95 percent effective when given to children. That leaves a 5 percent chance that kids who are vaccinated will contract measles. This means that no matter what, the disease still poses a public health risk, but we rely on others to get vaccinated to hugely reduce the likelihood of outbreaks. That?s the process known as herd immunity.


    Unvaccinated children threaten the herd. Take the San Diego measles outbreak of 2008. After unknowingly contracting the disease on a trip to Switzerland, an unvaccinated 7-year-old boy infected 11 other unvaccinated kids, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The majority of the cases occurred in kids whose parents had requested personal belief exemptions (or PBEs) through the state of California, one of 17 states to allow them. But three of the infected were either too young or medically unable to be vaccinated. And overall, 48 children too young to be vaccinated were quarantined, at an average cost to the family of $775 per child. The CDC noted that all 11 cases were ?linked epidemiologically? to the 7-year-old boy and that the outbreak response cost the public sector $10,376 per case.


    Today, several states blame a rise in preventable diseases on the declining child vaccination rates. In Michigan, less than 72 percent of children have received their state-mandated measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccines. In New York, as Caplan noted in his blog post, pockets of Brooklyn?s Hasidic Jewish community are experiencing a mini measles epidemic. Thirty cases have been confirmed so far. According to Dr. Yu Shia Lin of Maimonides Medical Center, some members of the community avoid the measles vaccine because they think it causes autism. The most visible proponent of this idea, former Playboy Playmate Jenny McCarthy, will receive a giant new platform for her viewpoints when she joins the daytime gossipfest The View on Sept. 9.


    The belief that the MMR vaccine causes autism goes back to a 1998 study published in the Lancet by a British gastroenterologist named Andrew Wakefield. In 2010, after years of criticism, the journal finally retracted Wakefield?s study, announcing that it was ?utterly clear, without any ambiguity at all, that the statements in the paper were utterly false.? Britain?s General Medical Council later revoked Wakefield?s medical license, noting that he?d failed to disclose his role as a paid consultant to lawyers representing parents who thought vaccines had harmed their kids. The CDC makes clear there is no connection between vaccines and autism.


    Yet this dangerous idea persists. Often, it persists among people who are simply doing what they think is best for their kids. Which is why it?s necessary to take extra measures to ensure nonvaccinators understand the risk they pose to other people?s children.


    Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, a professor of law at UC Hastings College of the Law and author of the blog Before Vaccines, argues in support of Caplan and his co-authors that if you fail to take reasonable precautions to prevent your child from transmitting a deadly virus to another child, you should bear the cost of that risk. If the government doesn?t impose liability, it is giving anti-vaxxer parents a free pass for posing a danger.


    There should be exceptions, of course. A child may be too young to receive a vaccine or may be undergoing a medical treatment like chemotherapy that prevents vaccines from working. A vaccine shortage or lack of access to a medical facility would legally excuse a parent for not vaccinating.


    There are legal obstacles to penalizing parents who don?t vaccinate their kids. Courts are generally less likely to impose liability on someone who fails to act than they are on someone who acts recklessly. Also, proving cause and effect will sometimes be difficult. Then again, to win damages, a plaintiff would only have to prove that it?s ?more likely than not? that a nonvaccinated child infected another person.


    Parents who don?t vaccinate their kids may have the most heartfelt reason in the world: fear for their own children?s safety. But the basis for that fear is simply unfounded, and their decisions are putting other kids directly at risk. The bottom line is that the government?s interest in protecting children from getting the measles should trump parents? interest in making medical decisions for their kids. The creators of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit seem to agree. The name of the episode in which a little girl dies as a result of a mother?s refusal to immunize her son? ?Selfish.?
    Do you agree that parents of unvaccinated children should be held responsible if it can be shown to be more likely than not that their child got another child sick?
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  2. #2
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    While I think that it will ultimately prove all but impossible to actually litigate, yes, I am all for it. The article states the obvious exceptions (kids going through chemo, shortage of vax, kids with proven reasons to NOT be vax'd etc) but yes. The people in my newsfeed who I ultimately had to defriend always posting one or another CRAZY conspiracy theory (Vax caused AIDS! Vax Causes AUTISM NEW PROOF etc etc etc) are nothing more than an uneducated and selfish liabilities riding the herd immunity coattails of the rest of us ~ and weakening it in their misguided and selfish desire to protect their special snowflake over the well being of society.

  3. #3
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,512

    Default

    My children are all up to date on all of their vaccines and I intend for them to stay that way. That however, was my choice. It is no one else's business to force me to vaccinate my child. I would be very angry if this became the norm.

    ~Bonita~

  4. #4
    Posting Addict ClairesMommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    My children are all up to date on all of their vaccines and I intend for them to stay that way. That however, was my choice. It is no one else's business to force me to vaccinate my child. I would be very angry if this became the norm.
    Yeah, and so many people who feel the way you do and who don't vaccinate their kids just ride the herd immunity provided by those who do vax and then say "Well, my kid's never gotten the measles so why should I vax?" or whatever.

    Why would you be 'angry' about it, Bonita? You followed carseat laws, didn't you? Why is legislating their use okay with you but not vaccinations? Are you angry that all the other parents out there are also 'forced' to use carseats to protect their children?

    Sorry, but I don't understand the logic.

  5. #5
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    When you mainstream your children into public school they will have to provide their vaccination records or they will NOT be going. Does that make you angry? It makes me happy, happy to know my kids are protected in their school.

  6. #6
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,512

    Default A variety of controversial topics.

    Quote Originally Posted by ClairesMommy View Post
    Yeah, and so many people who feel the way you do and who don't vaccinate their kids just ride the herd immunity provided by those who do vax and then say "Well, my kid's never gotten the measles so why should I vax?" or whatever.

    Why would you be 'angry' about it, Bonita? You followed carseat laws, didn't you? Why is legislating their use okay with you but not vaccinations? Are you angry that all the other parents out there are also 'forced' to use carseats to protect their children?

    Sorry, but I don't understand the logic.
    The use of car seats is not controversial. It is controversial to put chemicals into your body. Yes, I do vaccinate because I choose to, but I do not think that should be a forced decision any more that I think circumcision, breastfeeding vs. bottle feeding, putting your baby to sleep on her tummy, or any other parenting choice.

    ~Bonita~

  7. #7
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Potter75 View Post
    When you mainstream your children into public school they will have to provide their vaccination records or they will NOT be going. Does that make you angry? It makes me happy, happy to know my kids are protected in their school.
    This is not true in NY or TN (I personally know people in both places that do not vaccinate and have children in school). Different States have different rules, but in most places you can sign a waver and get an exemption.

    ~Bonita~

  8. #8
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    Its not a parenting choice, its a social issue and a huge global health issue. It'd be like you being against the FDA requiring cleanliness at meat packing plants or making restaurant workers wash their hands. Don't see you protesting your right to consume e coli burgers for fun.....this is the same thing.
    fuchsiasky likes this.

  9. #9
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    This is not true in NY or TN (I personally know people in both places that do not vaccinate and have children in school). Different States have different rules, but in most places you can sign a waver and get an exemption.
    No, it is true that all states require students to be vaccinated, because it promotes safety and public health. Yes, all states allow waivers, which are wildly abused, unfortunately, by selfish parents. Yes, those people getting waivers (all states allow some form of this) and sending their children into the school system are the ones who should be sued (exceptions as noted in my OP). I want protection from them. Or they can go live on their little island of non vaxers if they please.
    mommytoMR.FACE likes this.

  10. #10
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Potter75 View Post
    Its not a parenting choice, its a social issue and a huge global health issue. It'd be like you being against the FDA requiring cleanliness at meat packing plants or making restaurant workers wash their hands. Don't see you protesting your right to consume e coli burgers for fun.....this is the same thing.
    If someone wants to raise their own meat and eat it under cooked that is also their business.
    Quote Originally Posted by Potter75 View Post
    No, it is true that all states require students to be vaccinated, because it promotes safety and public health. Yes, all states allow waivers, which are wildly abused, unfortunately, by selfish parents. Yes, those people getting waivers (all states allow some form of this) and sending their children into the school system are the ones who should be sued (exceptions as noted in my OP). I want protection from them. Or they can go live on their little island of non vaxers if they please.
    You are also welcome to go live on your own little island where the Government dictates every aspect of your life.

    ~Bonita~

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions