Ethical Dilemma For Child Vaccinations

“Sustaining high vaccination coverage among school-age children is vital to prevent outbreaks and avoid reestablishment of diseases that have been eliminated in the United States” (Zangger, 2017). Most of the articles found, stated a variety of issues involved with noncompliant parental decisions made about not vaccinating their children. Of these issues, to my attention, the main problem with compliance of vaccines comes from the lack of knowledge about adverse effects and contraindications. What parents are missing is the fact that these childhood diseases are totally preventable diseases. We also are seeing a lot of parents choose to use an alternative vaccination schedule (AVS) instead of what is recommended by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that leads to the same kind of issue (Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine and council on the community, 2011). The studies show that parents have an increased likelihood of refusing to vaccinate due to the lack of education provided on the subject itself.

This explains the theory of why parents choose the non-vaccinated route for their children’s lives and explains it why it’s a social issue and not just a personal choice.

The attention coming from the Disneyland measles outbreak has brought up a controversial issue, something as preventable as measles spreading throughout the country because parents are uneasy about vaccinating their children from childhood diseases. The issue has many parents debating each other on what is right and wrong when it comes to vaccines and children. This hot topic has been all over the news in the last few months and has many parents standing their ground. Some parents feel doctors and the government pressure them to vaccinate, they believe vaccines are unnatural and can cause harm to a child later on. Others put faith in their child’s doctor and in vaccines without question, they were vaccinated so why

Implementing childhood vaccination policy in the United States has sparked controversy among parents and public health officials in determining the ethical implications of immunization mandates. The arguments of parents who refuse vaccinations for their children are multidimensional and tend to include a lack of clear understanding of safety measures and how their decisions affect society. In order to effectively communicate with parents with opposing perspectives while respecting their personal autonomy, it is important to intensify informational sessions that include the dangers of viruses that are preventable.

Parents should have the exclusive authority to make medical decisions on behalf of their minor children. Informed parents have the responsibility to refuse or discontinue treatments, even those that may be life-sustaining. This right extends to opting-out of vaccinations when in the best interests of the child. Although, these rights are being challenged. In addition, those parents choosing to opt-out of the vaccination program for their children are facing sanctions, ridicule as well as ostracized. A published article in, Pediatrics, confirm what other studies have suggested: “Anti-vaccine sentiment in the United States appears strongest among educated, wealthier white families. All 50 states have legislation requiring specified vaccines for students. Although exemptions vary from state to state, all school immunization laws grant exemptions to children for medical reasons.”

However, there are religious exemptions in all but two states. However, in twenty other states, personal exemptions allow the parents to make the autonomous decision for their children not to vaccinate. In Song’s research, parent’s believe that because theses childhood diseases have been eradicated that it is redundant to have their child immunized against such diseases.

In the 1850s the first school vaccination requirement were enacted to prevent smallpox. Federal and state efforts to eradicate measles in the 1960s and 1970s motivated many to mandate policies. By the 1990s, all 50 states requirement for children to be enrolled in school must receive certain immunizations and if these requirements were not met than children were not allowed to be enrolled in school (Center for Disease Control Prevention, 2010). For example, in the state of California, private public school or daycare cannot admit children unless vaccinations were received for all ten of the diseases. If the California Department of Public Health implements a requirement for vaccination parent can be allowed to obtain personal belief exemptions that would allow parents to opt out of vaccination for their children if form is filled out by healthcare professional that states vaccinations were countered to personal beliefs. This law has not been implemented as of yet but should be in 2016. The healthcare of policy decision in laws can have an influence on individuals based on the decision that are made. Health care policy and issues can affect providers and patients in many different ways. Stakeholders’ in the policymakers for vaccination main concern is the safety and health of children so the implement exemptions of laws from concern about vaccine

For years, universal childhood vaccinations have been a deliberated and debated topic among much of the population. Those who are in support of vaccination, including healthcare providers, believe that vaccinations are not only in the best interest of each child’s health, but also in the best interest of the public’s health as a whole. Many vaccine supporters also believe that the benefit of vaccinations outweigh the risks associated with them (Song, 2014, p. 542). Those who are not in support of vaccinations, or display hesitancy regarding them, may not perceive the continuing need for them or may decline them for various other reasons. Anti-vaccinators are also typically concerned with the safety of vaccinations and believe that the risks associated with them may be greater than their benefit (Song, 2014, p. 542). This paper will focus on discussing some of the ethical issues arising from childhood vaccinations, it will apply ethical principles such as autonomy and beneficence to the issue, and it will explore the role of the nursing profession and ethical standards by which they abide.

Over the years, there has been much controversy surrounding the subject of childhood vaccinations. With differing opinions, many are in favor about childhood vaccinations being required for children. Children vaccinations have been proven to be an effective means of preventing serious effects, including fatalities, from childhood illnesses yet there is still controversy over whether the risk of side effects from the vaccines outweighs the risk of contracting diseases. The belief behind mandatory vaccinations has been linked to people wanting vaccinations to be required for children because it will prevent the spread of childhood diseases, but there are still questions and concerns around why childhood vaccinations should be required. Questions surrounding this topic are: why should vaccines be required, are there any serious risks involved in vaccinating your child, and should children be turned away from school if they do not have vaccinations? There is also the question of should these vaccinations be mandatory or should this solely be a choice that the parents of the child should make? In order for us to be able to take our stance on the subject, we need to examine the answers to the question.

The classic essay Tragedy of the Commons describes the dilemma society faces when the interests of a group conflicts with the interests of individuals (Hardin, 1968). The example presented is that of a group of cattle ranchers commingling their cattle in a common pasture. At full capacity, each cattle owner still has an incentive to include additional cattle, since the slight decrease in overall yield per animal is offset by the additional animal. Unfortunately, this overgrazing inevitably leads to failure of the commons. The community goal of maximizing food production can only be achieved by placing controls on the interests of the individual cattle ranchers in favor of those of the community (Hardin, 1968). This paper is

Millions of lives have been saved thanks to a global effort to vaccinate for deadly diseases. Peter Yeo reports “Immunizations have saved more children than any other medical intervention in the last 50 years” (Reforming the U.N. 118). Yet, a new trend for parents is opting out of vaccinating their children for personal beliefs or religious exemptions. Although, the majority of Americans believe vaccines protect children, and conclusive evidence has proven vaccines can prevent the spread of deadly diseases. Still, a few parents believe vaccinating children is not essential for their health, additionally, they believe an increase in mandatory vaccines has insufficient scientific research to prevent serious medical side effects.

“Opting out of vaccinations puts public health at risk and could lead to a resurgence of dangerous diseases” (USA Today 1). If parents decide to not vaccinate their children it may pose a risk to the public as well as their child. It is still debated that a parent should or should not have the right to decide whether their child is vaccinated. Parents should not have the decision to vaccinate their child or not because by not being vaccinated death is likely, the disease is easily transmitted to a child who is not of age to be vaccinated, and it is necessary to keep the public healthy.

According to the Centers of Disease Control, about 92% of children were vaccinated for the measles, mumps, and rubella in 2016. 91% of children were also vaccinated for polio and the chicken pox. Looking at these statistics, we can see that parents in the United States are generally accepting of vaccines, which are serums that stimulate an immune response against certain viruses and prevent disease. Vaccines are important creations, since they have saved the human population from various diseases that used to cause epidemics. Though most parents do decide to vaccinate their children, there are still some parents who decide not to. Maybe it's for religious purposes, or maybe it’s just paranoia, but regardless of the parents reasoning for doing

Vaccination was first introduced globally for small pox and later on extended to other communicable diseases which are now known as vaccine preventable disease. Vaccination is beneficial both for individuals and community. This bring us to the ethical dilemma - Vaccination of a healthy child with the intention of protecting both the individual child and the community at the same time exposing the child to the theoretical risk of exposure to disease products whether live, attenuated or killed. There was a time when people never questioned the government or their physicians. Now because of more public awareness and accessibility to medical information, they are questioning the safety aspects of vaccines.

Parents face many different decisions when raising a child; some decisions are trivial, and others can be controversial. Whether or not to vaccinate a child is one of the most controversial choices. So controversial, in fact, that there is a political conversation of making immunizations a requirement. Many people support the movement of making vaccinations mandatory. Proponents argue that vaccines save lives, vaccine-preventable diseases have not been eradicated, and vaccines protect herd immunity. Many people also disagree with the possibility of required vaccinations. Opponents argue that vaccines cause harm, immunity by vaccinations is inferior to natural immunity, and government policies should not dictate personal medical choices.