 
     |
| Should a parent be forced to get a child immunized? (Page 2/7) |
|
blackrams
|
JUN 30, 09:52 AM
|
|
Illegals should be sent back, no question in my mind about that.
I would have to do more investigation/research as to your other questions, I assume that legal visitors must meet a minimal immunization standard but, don't know that for sure.
But, all you can do is immunize your child, what another parent does is beyond your and my control. As I said previously, the child at greatest risk is the non-immunized child.
------------------
Ron
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun?
My Uncle Frank was a staunch Conservative and voted straight Republican until the day he died in Chicago. Since then he has voted Democrat. Shrug
 [This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-30-2015).]
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
JUN 30, 10:03 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
life is a gamble and unless someone develops some miracle drug that can be administered to a pregnant mother to protect a fetus from conception forward, that will always be the case.
|
|
My guess is that would be as highly contested as current immunizations, if not more.
|
|
|
|
FlyinFieros
|
JUN 30, 10:05 AM
|
|
If you support anti-vax you should also be against mandatory quarantines for ebola infections. You know, for "freedom"...
| quote | Originally posted by 84fiero123:
I think from now on anyone who is working with Ebola people when they come back need to be quarantined for at least a month before they are ever let out in public again ! We do it to our animals when they come from countries that have diseases we have already eradicated from our shores.
|
|
Source.
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
JUN 30, 10:07 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
But, all you can do is immunize your child, what another parent does is beyond your and my control. As I said previously, the child at greatest risk is the non-immunized child.
|
|
The ability of the child to spread whatever disease it is, is a big risk as well.
About it being in your or my control, I mean , thats what this law in the books is about right?
|
|
|
|
fierofool
|
JUN 30, 10:07 AM
|
|
Like Steve, I grew up in a time of measles, mumps, whooping cough, polio, chicken pox, meningitis, smallpox and diphtheria. The Salk Polio vaccine came about when I was in early elementary school. Though there were some dangers to the drug, in the 12 classroom school that I attended, housing all grades, I can still remember 3 persons who were crippled by polio. Today, I can't say that I know of any young person who has contracted the disease.
Often parents, including my own, would purposely expose us to measles, mumps or chicken pox in order to get the anti-bodies into our system. At the same time, if a child had one of these diseases, they were not allowed into school for a period of time while they were deemed contagious. Smallpox vaccinations were mandatory and a child wasn't allowed to start school without it. There were probably more, but I don't remember. Even if you had a shot record indicating vaccination, if you didn't have the scar, you got another during the health department's visit to the school in the early part of the school year. I have probably had about a dozen smallpox vaccinations between school and my military travels. Still no scar.
When some diseases can cause untold numbers of deaths, it might be best that a vaccination be required. Parents are often reluctant, not because the government requires it, but because of the possibility of the vaccine causing physical or mental side effects, or even death to their child. They're not willing to take that chance, but are willing to take the chance that the same might happen to their child and to others if their child contracts a disease. But a government and parents, both, must weight the balance of personal choice and freedom against the well-being of society, since we are a social species and make contact with untold numbers of persons to whom we could spread a disease that might cause death to another. I just can't see that it be mandatory for vaccinations against non-lethal diseases, though. In today's Me, Me world when everyone is concerned only about themselves, I can see where some mandatory vaccinations might be needed.[This message has been edited by fierofool (edited 06-30-2015).]
|
|
|
blackrams
|
JUN 30, 10:11 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by FlyinFieros:
If you support anti-vax you should also be against mandatory quarantines for ebola infections. You know, for "freedom"...
Source. |
|
My only question to you would be, is Ebola considered a disease that can be immunized against at this time? I know this wasn't addressed to me but, I just had to ask.
------------------
Ron
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun?
My Uncle Frank was a staunch Conservative and voted straight Republican until the day he died in Chicago. Since then he has voted Democrat. Shrug
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-30-2015).]
|
|
|
blackrams
|
JUN 30, 10:20 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 2.5:
The ability of the child to spread whatever disease it is, is a big risk as well.
About it being in your or my control, I mean , thats what this law in the books is about right? |
|
Yes, children do run a much greater risk of spreading infectious diseases. As I read the proposed law, children would not be allowed to be in schools, day care centers and a few other venues if not immunized. And yes, my children were immunized for all the things the doctor's recommended but, that was my wife's and my decision. I don't want to live in a Nanny State where Big Brother defines how I raise my child. I don't think most other folks do either. As we let our rights be eroded a little at a time, we will eventually be without any rights. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights is all about individual freedoms and the rights of the individual. Is this for the common good, yes but, it also destroys the rights of parents to decide. Not much different than Libs wanting to take away our right to bear arms, it's for the common good of the nation. 
------------------
Ron
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun?
My Uncle Frank was a staunch Conservative and voted straight Republican until the day he died in Chicago. Since then he has voted Democrat. Shrug
|
|
|
|
Doug85GT
|
JUN 30, 10:28 AM
|
|
So far, I support this law. If the parents don't want to immunize their child, then they have to home school them. It makes sense to me. An unvaccinated child can bring in diseases that puts other children at risk that cannot be vaccinated, such as kids that have compromised immune systems or allergies to the vaccine.
It does not force them to vaccinate. There is still the option to home school.[This message has been edited by Doug85GT (edited 06-30-2015).]
|
|
|
|
theBDub
|
JUN 30, 10:40 AM
|
|
They don't have to, if they also want to keep their child from contacting other children.
But if they want to send them to school, then yes, they should be forced to be immunized. I'm not usually "it's what's best for society" and usually all about individual rights, but in this case every single moronic parent that decides against immunization is a threat to others. You get to decide your own health but you don't get to decide the health of others. Some people can't get immunized because of medical reasons, and they need the protection of herd immunity. You break the herd, you are placing others in harms way. Stay home or get shots.
|
|
|
|
fierofool
|
JUN 30, 10:40 AM
|
|
|
Doug, I'm not arguing your point of view, but should that also require the need for the child to be totally isolated in the home for fear of contracting or spreading a disease? I do see the necessity that some not be vaccinated due to allergic reactions. My wife's highly compromised immune system prevents her from getting pneumonia or shingles vaccinations.
|
|
|
|