This cartoon shows a mom and a dad protesting against vaccines. The mom and the dad seem happy, but their child looks sick with chicken pox and sad. This cartoon shows the dad telling his son he represents the right of parents to choose over their children. It also shows the mom asking her son how he feels. This source informs me that while parents are out there protesting, their children are getting sick because they need their vaccines. I can use this source by describing how their children might feel about this. It is biased because the author of this cartoon gives a point of view on how the child would be sick for not receiving his vaccines to prevent sickness.
According to Jake Johnson in his critically acclaimed essay, Vaccines: Made for the Vulnerable, Given to the Weak-Minded, the key to societal progress is a healthy population. In the midst of a recent trend in boycotting essential vaccinations, Mr. Johnson presents a ridiculous proposal that encapsulates the exaggerated mindset of the Americans who are skeptical of vaccines. With a satirical approach through sarcasm and irony, paired with ridiculous interpretations of facts, Mr. Johnson urges the American population to recognize the benefits of vaccinations, and receive them as responsible citizens.
The source I located is entitled Calling the Shots: Why Parents Reject Vaccines. This book begins with an introduction that recounts a story of a little girl suffering from cancer who almost passed away from contracting a virus that could have been prevented had others who were able to receive immunization did so. This story focuses on the danger that unimmunized children bring to children with compromised health. It goes on to speak about where parental rights end and government rights begin and all the immunization laws that have ever been in place in America. Further in the book, the idea of rights is explored and how mandatory vaccinations would infringe upon the inherent authority parents have over decisions involving their children. Topics
Persuasive Case Study Analysis In the United States, there is a great ideological debate afoot regarding the vaccination of children. In the 2015 editorial “I'm Coming Out... as Pro-Vaccine” parenting culture writer JJ Keith outlines various points of view regarding vaccines. While Keith’s agenda in the writings is expressly to defend and encourage the practice vaccinating children, the author also attempts to acknowledge, address, and rebuke the concerns of “anti-vaxers” (para. 11).
The ancient Hebrew concept of the afterlife contrasts only slightly with the worldview of the Egyptians. Interestingly, the Israelites experienced slavery in Egypt, exile in Babylon, and later in the twentieth century, murderous persecution in Germany; yet, the Hebrew people showed extraordinary resolve by reconciling with their tormentors mere decades after oppression. The Egyptians also assimilated many Hebrew ideals and customs a few years after the Hebrew exodus from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. One area in which the Egyptians would not compromise, however, involved the afterlife. Both the Egyptians and Hebrews emphasized an available afterlife for households, including slaves, pets, and distant relatives.
The controversy over vaccination has two sides, the one side believes that vaccines are a crucial part in saving lives. The other side, believes that vaccination do more harm then good. This controversy over vaccination has been going on since the introduction of vaccine. Vaccines were introduced to the medical community in the 1800’s by a physician named Edward Jenner. The controversy really started with the Vaccination Act of 1840, which made vaccines free for the poor. In 1853 the Compulsory vaccination Act was passed, that made all infants under three months of life, and if not done you were to pay a fine. The anti-vaccination league challenged the law, because they felt that the compulsory vaccination act challenged there basic rights
Most parents believes “that vaccination may actually be causing chronic health problems.”( “The Vaccine Controversy.” http://www.know-vaccines.org/?page_id=456.)
As parents are refusing to vaccinate their children against these “long-gone” diseases due to the concern for the vaccine’s safety, they are opening the doors for those diseases like polio and measles to devastate the whole American community once again. These parents react this way because they have different realities. For example, every american back when Franklin D Roosevelt was alive knew what polio was and what it was capable of due to the effect that it had on a nation's president. Nowadays, parents are drawn to campaigns on the safety of vaccinations because of celebrities or other personalities that are protesting against vaccinations due to personal negative experience with expressed vaccine. Since many parents nowadays have not had any personal experiences with most vaccine-preventable diseases they are quick to act when, for example, Jenny McCarthy speaks up about the possibility that autism can be caused by today's vaccinations because many americans have had personal experiences with this disease or are more familiar with this disease since it is widely covered in recent media.
Controversy concerning the risks of vaccinations will always exist. As is the nature of a preventative intervention, it is difficult to rationalize giving a completely healthy child an injection that is known to have varying degrees of sides affects5. Additionally, these injections are to provide immunity to children for diseases that have an extremely low risk of circulating within a population. Since these vaccines have been able to protect so many individuals from experiencing these dangerous infections, most parents do not even have personal experiences regarding the impact of these diseases. As such, many parents do not see the vaccine-preventable disease as a threat to their child. This often causes parents to not fully understand the risk their child has for contracting a disease and the subsequent danger of a vaccine-preventable disease infection verses the potential side effect of a vaccine which is normally only mild to moderate discomfort for their child15.
“As healthy as my lifestyle seemed, I contracted measles, mumps, rubella, a type of viral meningitis, scarlatina, whooping cough, yearly tonsillitis, and chickenpox, some of which are vaccine preventable” (Parker 1). This quote by vaccine advocate Amy Parker, a woman who was not vaccinated as a child, shows just a glimpse into the life of an unvaccinated individual. Parents who do not vaccinate their children claim many different reasons for their decision. Three of the most popular reasons are: religious grounds, health problems as a result from vaccines, and the belief that the illnesses are rare. Each of these reasons can be proven as nonessential in the anti-vaccine argument.
The articles “Cognitive Processes and the Decisions of Some Parents to Forego Pertussis Vaccination for Their Children” by J. Meszaros, D. Asch, J. Baron, J. Hershey, H. Kunreuther, and J. Schwartz-Buzaglo; “Illusion of Control: The Role of Personal Involvement” by Ion Yarritu, Helena Matute, and Miguel A. Vadillo; and “Responding to Parental Refusals of Immunization of Children” by Douglas S. Diekema help to describe the relationship between non-vaccinating parents and pediatricians, and the cognitive biases that run this relationship. One question addressed in the article “Cognitive Processes and the Decisions of Some Parents to Forego Pertussis Vaccination for Their Children” is, “What are the factors leading up to a parent deciding that they will not vaccinate their children?” (Meszaros, Asch, Baron, Hershey, Kunreuther, & Schwartz-Buzaglo, 1996) This question is expanded upon further in “Illusion of Control: The Role of Personal Involvement” (Yarritu, Matute, & Vadillo, 2014) and “Responding to Parental Refusals of Immunization of Children.” (Diekema, 2005) The question that connects these three papers, and the question that must be answered, is “What are the cognitive biases that dictate the likelihood of a parent vaccinating their child, and how can pediatricians be more aware of and attempt to rectify these biases?”
Through the rise of technological advances in medicine, the vaccine has changed the world for the greater good of the human race. Making a great triumph and virtually eliminating an array of life-threatening diseases, from smallpox to diphtheria, thus adding approximately thirty years to many humans’ life spans. Although, a new complication has arisen, possibly linking neurological digression with this rise of new vaccines. Such a digression has forced parents to exempt their children from receiving vaccinations and brought forth mental anguish affecting the minds of many.
Vaccines save lives; fear endangers them. Vaccinations have been used since the 18th century to cure various deadly diseases, from smallpox to the influenza virus. On a global level, vaccination is one of the few cost-effective medical measures that result in universal benefit. Yet there have always been those opposed to vaccinations because of possible side effects. With the increase in technology and the ability to share ideas in modern society the anti vaccine movement has flourished making the eradication of disease and safety of the public a difficult task. The anti-vaccine movement in the United States is one which brings about a very serious issue of safety. Vaccinations are put in place to protect people; they are administered by trained professionals who weigh the costs and benefits of vaccines. Yet there are still people out there who refuse to be vaccinated out of fear and therefore decide for themselves the effectiveness of vaccines. In order to ensure a safe society the public needs to be educated about vaccine in order to make a truly informed decision.
The number of individuals who are unvaccinated or infected in the United States has increased (Sun). Vaccines recommended for children are crucial and result in fewer health risks and greater healthy lifestyles. Proponents agree that vaccines are safe and effective, while opponents disagree and believe that vaccines create more negative outcomes than positive ("Should Any Vaccines..."). Opponents attempt to influence and persuade the majority of individuals to stray away from their viewpoints relating to the encouragement of vaccinating children. The rising percentage of children and parents who reject immunization and protest safe vaccines indicate less triumph for sufficient immunization for the population. There are many detrimental risks that affect unvaccinated children, and supporting childhood vaccinations profoundly benefits each parent and child.
Should parents vaccinate their children? Parents should vaccinate their children because it can keep them and other children healthy..“Worldwide, 242,000 children a year die from measles, but it used to be near one million. The deaths have dropped because of vaccination, a 68 percent decrease from 2000 to 2006”. (NewYorkTimes.com) “Children who are not vaccinated are unnecessarily susceptible to serious illnesses, they say, but also present a danger to children who have had their shots”. Written by Jennifer Steinhauer in 2008. Parents should vaccinate their children because vaccines can save many lives.
In the short story, “In Another Country” Ernest Hemingway writes about wounded soldiers who are trying to recuperate and come to terms with their losses as they face everyday struggles within themselves. During World War I, an American who is sought to be a man named Nick Adams, according to critique Mazzeno, is joined together with other soldiers much alike him and meets with them every afternoon in the hospital of Milan, Italy to be healed by machines they used to regain their physical ability. In fact, the reader may assume that they are troubled by what the war has caused them this story has a deeper meaning in a way Hemingway describes each man with different losses they tend to face. However, a closer analysis of the story describes not only the American but also that the Italian major undergo the struggle of their losses not only to be physically but mentally and emotionally.