I don't think taking a child(ren) from their home is something that should be taken lightly, but situations such as this make me really think about it long and hard. When is it ok to remove someone's child from their home? When does the public health outweigh personal rights? At what point do the at-risk children, and their parents, have some say in this?
As others have pointed out, this is about herd immunity, which protects those who simply cannot be vaccinated. We're talking children at their most vulnerable state, and others who've got worse problems (Children who undergo chemotherapy can't be vaccinated either, though, I'm not sure if it's 100% across the board for any/all chemo).
Additionally, the burden of proof, as always, rests with the accuser, not the accused. Vaccinations and their efficacy have undergone quite a bit of testing pre and post-invention/FDA approval process (And the declines/eradication of some of these diseases are astounding...let's not forget that either). The Autism study that any argument/debate over this topic, started from, was debunked years ago, however because of mouth pieces like Rob Schneider and Jenny McCarthy (the brilliant minds of the 20th century), you've got just enough crazies to have now impacted the herd immunity.
Now, you could ban them from public schools and other high risk areas, like Pediatric facilities, but I feel that unfairly punishes the child. It's not their fault their parents have done this to them. It's the parents who've done this, so whatever course of action should impact the parents the most, imo.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
