I vaccinate my children, but I oppose vaccinations being forced on those who don't believe in them. Just as women have the right to choose whether to terminate a pregnancy or not, a parent should have the authority to make health decisions such as vaccinating their children or not.
If a parent's refusal to vaccinate their child only impacted the health of that child, I would have no problem with their decision. Unfortunately, that unvaccinated child then becomes a danger to others - those who CANNOT get vaccinated for health reasons, the very young child who CANNOT yet be vaccinated, and the vulnerable, immunocompromised population of our society, all of whom will suffer the consequences of the parent who refuses to vaccinate a child who CAN be vaccinated. The decision, IMO, is ignorant at best, (vaccinations are overwhelmingly safe and effective; the diseases they prevent are much more dangerous) and selfish at worst.
Also, no one is forcing vaccinations, just protecting society from those who choose not to vaccinate. Anti-vaxxers can home-school if it is that important to them. It won't solve the problem of unvaccinated kids passing disease around, but at least they won't be allowed in the public school setting.
California is on the right track. I hope other states follow suit.
I understand this also, as one of my children had to stop their vaccine schedule when we were undergoing testing for mitochondrial issues. Thankfully, she is fine and was able to receive the full schedule once tests came back clear, but I still think parents should have the right to refuse vaccines for their children.
I understand this also, as one of my children had to stop their vaccine schedule when we were undergoing testing for mitochondrial issues. Thankfully, she is fine and was able to receive the full schedule once tests came back clear, but I still think parents should have the right to refuse vaccines for their children.
Parents still do retain the right to refuse.
From the article above:
"There is no legal requirement to vaccinate children. Parents can home-school unvaccinated children."
But now those parents will be inconvenienced by having to home school their kids due to their decision. That seems fair to me since now, by their own choice, their children are potentially a danger to society.
Also, this- from the article- really bothers me. We're essentially restricting rights of US citizens because non-citizens are importing diseases. We need to be stricter with border control.
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and California state health officials said pockets of people philosophically opposed to vaccines were helping measles cases imported from other countries take hold and spread."
Parents still do retain the right to refuse.
From the article above:
"There is no legal requirement to vaccinate children. Parents can home-school unvaccinated children."
But now those parents will be inconvenienced by having to home school their kids due to their decision. That seems fair to me since now, by their own choice, their children are potentially a danger to society.
I am not in favor of the gvt telling you that you HAVE to do something. That is not their job. Their job, one of them, is to secure the borders which is a huge issue. The diseases brought in are no joke, as we are seeing.
Also, this- from the article- really bothers me. We're essentially restricting rights of US citizens because non-citizens are importing diseases. We need to be stricter with border control.
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and California state health officials said pockets of people philosophically opposed to vaccines were helping measles cases imported from other countries take hold and spread."
I was hoping someone was going to point that out. You can refuse all you want, but LIVE with the consequences of that decision. You will need to homeschool or find a sympathetic private school. Decisions have consequences. That's all that has happened with this legislation.