Argument Essay Sydney Bess-2
.pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Central Piedmont Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
114
Subject
Arts Humanities
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
Pages
5
Uploaded by JudgeRainWallaby37
Bess 1
Sydney Bess
Professor Virginia Mullins
Argumentative Essay
22 February 2024
Exploring Individual Choices: Case Against Mandatory Vaccinations
Vaccines have played a vital role in controlling the spread of infectious diseases and
public health safety. However, the question of whether vaccines should be mandatory has
sparked immense debates. Vaccines should not be mandatory because of religious beliefs,
medical exemptions, and concerns about government overreach of individual freedom.
Religious beliefs often involve healthcare decisions, and mandatory vaccinations can
clash with certain beliefs that emphasize natural healing practices. For instance, some religious
communities reject medical interventions and rely on prayer or alternative remedies.
Recognizing this, many states have incorporated religious exemptions, allowing individuals to
not jeopardize their beliefs while also maintaining public safety concerns. “Several parents who
say their religious beliefs have led them to keep their children unvaccinated and out of
Mississippi schools. According to the lawsuit, some of the plaintiffs are homeschooling their
children.” (Williams, 2023) While some may argue that these exemptions contribute to lower
vaccination rates, evidence suggests that accommodating religious beliefs can coexist with
maintaining overall community immunity, as demonstrated by the limited impact on disease
rates.
The second discussion of this argument against mandatory vaccinations involves medical
exemptions. Some individuals, due to specific medical conditions, face health concerns when
Bess 2
exposed to certain vaccine ingredients. “If a physician licensed to practice medicine in this State
certifies that a required immunization is or may be detrimental to a person's health due to the
presence of one of the contraindications adopted by the Commission, the person is not required
to receive the specified immunization as long as the contraindication persists.” (NCDHHS CDC,
2020) Experts often discuss that not everyone can safely receive vaccines the same as one
another, and forcing vaccinations upon such individuals may pose a threat to their health. Ethical
considerations further the importance of respecting the rights of individuals with medical
exemptions. The intricate dynamic between public health and individual well-being requires
acknowledging and accommodating these exemptions.
Government overreach is a major concern of those who are against mandatory vaccines
as they feel it goes against the First Amendment. When the government plays a role in health
matters it tends to raise controversy of how far each state can go to mandate individuals
healthcare choices. “Unvaccinated people are approximately 15 times more likely to die from the
disease than the vaccinated. Nonetheless, even among the majority of Americans who accept that
the vaccines are safe and effective, some argue that individuals should be able to choose whether
to get the jab. They regard government mandates in this domain as a bridge too far.” (Frankel,
2022) The consequences of government overreach in healthcare and individual medical choices
should be heavily considered because the impacts and protests can be substantial on society.
While many are in favor of mandatory vaccinations to support the high immunization
rates leading to a lower rate of the spread of infectious diseases, a healthy balance with
individual choices is crucial. Many times vaccine mandates are made on limited knowledge to
help slow the spread of infectious diseases. Due to the time crunch and lack of knowledge, this
Bess 3
causes many individuals to question the effectiveness and safety of their bodies. Many were in
favor of mandatory vaccines for COVID-19 in desperation to slow the rapid spreading of this
deadly disease. However, researchers are still unsure of the long-term effects and how long the
dosage protects individuals. “It is not yet known how long the protection of the COVID-19
vaccine will last. We will know more through ongoing research. Clinical trials are currently
happening to find out if we will need booster doses on an annual or longer basis.” (AU GOV,
2023) By acknowledging both points of view, understandably, at the time when COVID-19 was
at its peak it was tempting to get the mandatory vaccines, in hopes of slowing the spread and
slowing the high death rates. But the other point of view finds it essential to recognize that the
long-term effects and length of protection from the dosage is an essential piece of necessary
knowledge before partaking in receiving the vaccine.
Individuals who support vaccine mandates find that these mandates are essential for
public safety. By making vaccines mandatory there is no concern about if someone in society is
unvaccinated. Mandatory vaccines are shown to help increase safety in vulnerable populations
such as nursing homes, homeless shelters, and hospitals. However, this is all true. It is important
to acknowledge the individuals who protect their choices over their healthcare decisions. Vaccine
mandates are supportive of informed decision making hoping to lessen the misinformation. But
oftentimes these mandates are made so quickly in hopes to slow the spread of infectious diseases.
There is often room for misinformation and a lack of resourceful information. Acknowledging
both sides of the argument showcases how if both points of view are understood it is possible to
create a healthy environment that protects individuals that are at a high risk of contracting the
diseases and individual choices.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help