should receiving vaccines be mandatory??

[Grace of God]

We hear so much these days of how important vaccines are, should people be forced by law to accept vaccines for themselves and their children??

[SteveH]

Yes. Bollocks to the anti-vaxers. They are monumentally irresponsible.

[Owlswing]

Either an emphatic "yes" or free NHS treatment should be refused for the treatment of any disease for which the vaccine has been refused.

[torridon]

We can take steps to protect children from irresponsible parenting; with adults, it's not so clear. We can't outlaw stupidity.

[Anchorman]

Yes. Vaccination doesn't only protect the individual, it can prevent a potential epidemic which can kill others. Since there's vanishingly little evidence that vaccines cause health problems (with the possible exception of those delivered by albumen based solutions, and that can be overcome) vaccination is a sign of a responsible society.

[floo]

When I was a kid in Guernsey in the 50s, vaccination against smallpox was compulsory. I have the scar at the top of my arm, like many of my generation.  Unless there is a health reason why a child shouldn't be vaccinated against the childhood ailments, I think vaccinations should be compulsory here in the UK.

[Harrowby Hall]

The following comes from The Local, an English language news website in France:


Eleven vaccinations for young children will be made compulsory in France from 2018. A "short term evil for the long term good", doctors say.
France's new prime minister Edouard Philippe announced during Tuesday's parliamentary address that from 2018 vaccines for young children that are unanimously recommended by health authorities will become obligatory from 2018.
 
...
 
Three vaccines: diptheria, tetanus and polio are already obligatory but from 2018 these will be joined by eight more: whooping cough, measles, mumps, rubella, hepatitus B, influenza, pneumonia and meningitis C.
 
At present these vaccinations are only recommended by the state and the decision whether or not to inoculate a child is left in the hands of the parents, who are often swayed by theories and scare stories about health risks of certain vaccines.
 
Philippe said in his speech on Tuesday that "diseases that we believed to be eradicated are developing once again, children are dying of the measles in France and in the country of Pasteur, that is unacceptable."
 
 

The article states that a similar programme is underway in Italy.

Parents should be made aware that they do not own their children but have a duty of care to them. Deliberately increasing the risk that their children may contract a serious illness due to a decision to withhold vaccination is a clear dereliction of that duty of care.

The Wakefield affair still appears to be influencing some people. The fact that Wakefield was deliberately misrepresenting MMR - mainly because he had a financial interest in a similar product - ought now to be generally accepted ... but there still appear to people who believe there was a conspiracy against him.

 

[Robbie]

Either an emphatic "yes" or free NHS treatment should be refused for the treatment of any disease for which the vaccine has been refused.

You wouldn't refuse treatment for children, though, would you? They aren't responsible for their parents' decision.

[floo]

You wouldn't refuse treatment for children, though, would you? They aren't responsible for their parents' decision.

I would hope not.

[Owlswing]

You wouldn't refuse treatment for children, though, would you? They aren't responsible for their parents' decision.

Please note that I did say "free" NHS treatment should be refused, the parents refused the vaccination , the parents pay for the treatment.

[jeremyp]

free NHS treatment should be refused for the treatment of any disease for which the vaccine has been refused.

Bad idea.

Firstly, in the case of children, you'd be punishing the child for the parents' wrong doing.

Secondly, you do not want unreported cases of people with infectious diseases. They'll go round spreading it to people who can't be vaccinated because they are allergic etc.

[splashscuba]

There's a case to refuse access to common areas (public buildings etc) to those who refuse to be vaccinated or don't allow their children to be vaccinated.

[Rhiannon]

There's a case to refuse access to common areas (public buildings etc) to those who refuse to be vaccinated or don't allow their children to be vaccinated.

Unenforceable though I’d think. Who is going to check that all kids have valid vax certificates in order to enter cinemas or cafes?

It is possible for non vaccinated kids to be banned from schools, pre-schools, holiday clubs etc and maybe it could work with holiday camps (Centre Parcs etc) - after all you can’t kennel a cat or dog without showing a vax cert. And the same could apply to flying.

[Sassy]

We hear so much these days of how important vaccines are, should people be forced by law to accept vaccines for themselves and their children??

People should not be allowed to enter the country unless they can prove they have had all the necessary vaccines.
The reason so many childhood illness are reappearing is because of people who have had no vaccinations coming to live here.

[Harrowby Hall]

The reason so many childhood illness are reappearing is because of people who have had no vaccinations coming to live here.

Do you have any evidence for this? Or is it merely Brexit-related xenophobia?

[Grace of God]

hmm it seems you are all about taking away the rights of others to force vaccines yet when it comes to not treating fat people or people who smoke , drink heavily that is different, that seems odd...

if some choose not to be vaccinated that is their choice and risk, if everyone else is vaccinated they pose no risk to anyone else if the vaccine works, surely...

[Anchorman]

hmm it seems you are all about taking away the rights of others to force vaccines yet when it comes to not treating fat people or people who smoke , drink heavily that is different, that seems odd...

if some choose not to be vaccinated that is their choice and risk, if everyone else is vaccinated they pose no risk to anyone else if the vaccine works, surely...

Nope.
I'm giving others the right to be protected against life-limiting illness.
I'm old enough to remember a couplr of polio victims at school, and the suffering they endured.
Universal polio vaccine virtually eradicated that suffering.My dad was a TB victim as a teenager - he spent nine months in an open air sanatorium in Millport, a small town on an island in the Firth of Clyde.
His lungs never fully recovered....he returned to his job as a miner - there was no alternative - and his death at an early age was inevitable.
The BCG innoculation used to be available in all schools (and pretty painful it was as well) Apparently this is no longer the case; TB has been allowed to mutate and once more claims lives.
Do I want people to avoid a slow, lingering death because someone else wants to assert a dubious right?
You bet.
bring back universal BCG innoculations now.

[SteveH]

hmm it seems you are all about taking away the rights of others to force vaccines yet when it comes to not treating fat people or people who smoke , drink heavily that is different, that seems odd...

if some choose not to be vaccinated that is their choice and risk, if everyone else is vaccinated they pose no risk to anyone else if the vaccine works, surely...

OK, fair point, I suppose I must grudgingly admit. Anti-vaxers should be strongly encouraged to have vaccinations, and their anti-scientific nonsense countered by means of public information programmes, but they should not be absolutely forced to have vaccinations (though refusing them for their children is another matter, like blood transfusions for the children of JWs). The NHS must remain free at point of use for all, including smokers, heavy drinkers, the obese, the unvaccinated, etc. It's a vital principle, and we must not start chipping away at it.

[Robbie]

hmm it seems you are all about taking away the rights of others to force vaccines yet when it comes to not treating fat people or people who smoke , drink heavily that is different, that seems odd...

if some choose not to be vaccinated that is their choice and risk, if everyone else is vaccinated they pose no risk to anyone else if the vaccine works, surely...

Stop twisting. You're losing credibility.

What StephenH said below.

[SteveH]

Are we to assume that you, GoG, are an anti-vaxer?

[Stranger]

hmm it seems you are all about taking away the rights of others to force vaccines yet when it comes to not treating fat people or people who smoke , drink heavily that is different, that seems odd...

Firstly, not vaccinating puts other people at risk. Secondly, nobody (afaik) is suggesting that the penalty for not getting vaccinated would be not getting treated; universal health care is an important principle.

if some choose not to be vaccinated that is their choice and risk, if everyone else is vaccinated they pose no risk to anyone else if the vaccine works, surely...

Not true. Not everybody can be vaccinated (the very young, people with immune system problems, and so on) - also vaccines are very effective but not perfect. If a large enough minority of people don't get vaccinated, then it can damage herd immunity and put many vulnerable people at risk, see: Herd Immunity: How does it work?

[splashscuba]

Unenforceable though I’d think. Who is going to check that all kids have valid vax certificates in order to enter cinemas or cafes?

It is possible for non vaccinated kids to be banned from schools, pre-schools, holiday clubs etc and maybe it could work with holiday camps (Centre Parcs etc) - after all you can’t kennel a cat or dog without showing a vax cert. And the same could apply to flying.

Agreed

[Harrowby Hall]

if some choose not to be vaccinated that is their choice and risk, if everyone else is vaccinated they pose no risk to anyone else if the vaccine works, surely...

I'm not sure that this is a valid argument.

There is the concept of "herd immunity" -  which enables a population to be protected from a disease after vaccination by stopping the agent responsible for the infection being transmitted between people. In this way even those people who cannot be vaccinated, for whatever reason, can be protected. So, by being vaccinated yourself you are helping to protect those people who are unable to be vaccinated. By not being vaccinated you are increasing the likelihood of infection being transmitted.

So, by being vaccinated yourself you are not "passing over on the other side". (However, my observations suggest that vocal, self-proclaimed "Christians" do not seem to understand this concept.)

[Rhiannon]

One of the largest groups who can’t be vaccinated are the under ones. By not getting your own child vaccinated you put babies at risk, at an age where they struggle to cope.

[Udayana]

...
By not being vaccinated you are increasing the likelihood of infection being transmitted.
...

By how much? The % of the population that needs to be vaccinated for herd immunity to be effective must vary by disease?