Essay Childhood Vaccinations: A Game of Russian Roulette?

Children come into the world defenseless and vulnerable. The lifelong health of a child begins with what type of defense can be built up. Childhood vaccine schedules are the first step in healthcare for children. A vaccine schedule is a calendar with a combination of vaccines at set intervals and ages for children to receive from birth to six years old *******. The recommended combination of vaccines on the schedule minimizes the amount of times a child needs to get vaccines. Maximizing the number of vaccines a child receives at a time guarantees by school age, the child will meet requirements for enrolling in school. The childhood vaccination schedule was created to be beneficial for children.

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? Parents with infants and young children have been tussling with this proverbial question for several decades now. With the advent of the internet and the World Wide Web, parents have been bombarded with a plethora of information about pros and cons of vaccines from all kinds of sources, some creditable, and some are not. To the non-scientific community, these conflicting information can create problems in the decision making process; thus, forcing parents to make the wrong choices and putting their offspring and others at risk. However, this article will attempt to address the importance of vaccinations, how vaccines work, why we should vaccinate, and why parents should not be afraid to vaccinate their offspring.

While supporting the voluntary immunization for children and defending the right to have information regarding the risk involved with vaccines, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) oppose the elimination of or possible barriers of entry to obtain Non-Medical Exemptions. In an effort to reduce vaccine related injuries and/or death and support those who do not want to receive vaccines due to personal, spiritual, or religious beliefs, the NVIC supports the right to Non-Medical Exemptions. The primary purpose of this paper is to analyze the safety, efficacy, and economic burden of vaccines, as well as the right to choice in regards to Non-Medical Exemptions.

“Immunizing Against Bad Science: The Vaccine Court and the Autism Test Case,” written by Lauren L. Haertlein, deals with one of today’s most popular controversies; vaccinations causing autism in children. Haertlein’s article gives insight into the history of vaccine litigation and the policies that accompany it. Furthermore, she talks immensely about the Vaccine Court, whose job is to work with petitioner’s stating that a vaccine, such as measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), has caused some illness to their child. The article uses

Hendrix, Kristin S., et al. "Ethics and Childhood Vaccination Policy in the United States." American Journal of Public Health, vol. 106, no. 2, Feb. 2016, pp. 273-278. EBSCOhost, doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.302952.

The United States will certainly experience increasing numbers of cases filed in the US Court of Federal Claims (Vaccine Court) (Newton 2013, 336). The costs incurred include employing additional lawyers and judges and paying damages awarded in any lost litigations. In addition, a government fear of potential lawsuits may initiate changes in FDA regulations, which perpetuates increased vaccine costs due to higher regulations and monitoring to produce “safer and more effective” vaccinations. Consequentially, the pharmaceutical industry will increase research and development costs resulting in more expensive governmentally distributed vaccines than previously reported. The many costs depicted above makes a mandatory vaccination policy a poor investment if the numerous potential benefits are not

Only recently, a federal injunction lifted the act forbade mandatory anthrax vaccinations for members of the armed services. The service members that sued insisted that the safety of the vaccine was not fully determined and a federal court supported the claim until the FDA determined the safety of the product. Furthermore, claims by parents who suspect the development of Autism as a link to mandatory childhood vaccinations has provided additional legal action as the parents pursue injunctions to prevent continued vaccination of their children.

For a long time, mandatory immunizations on populations have been debatable with respect to public health law in the United States. One argued topic is whether the level of authority to administer such mandates resides at the federal or state or state level. An analysis of the United States Constitution provides some clarity. The role of the Federal Government is somewhat limited with regards to public health, and its role marks a clear distinction from state and local authority over health matters. The Commerce Clause, within Article I of the United States Constitution, gives federal jurisdiction over certain public health issues. It states that “Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nationals, and among the several states. (CITE CONSTITUTION). This limited authority allows federal agencies to introduce and administer regulations to prevent the spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries and between the states, as in quarantine. However, “no mandatory vaccination programs” or “regulations regarding the implementation of a mandatory vaccination program” exist at this level. (CITE SWENDIMAN p.7). The 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution provides the authority by which states draft and implement public health policy and effort. It states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States

A public safety issue that is this huge has many interested parties but the main three are parents, medical professionals and the federal government. Parents have a strong interest in this issue because of their natural concern for the safety of their children. It’s a parent’s responsibility to make the best decisions they can with the information they have, in regards to the health of their children. Medical professionals also have a strong connection to this issue for several reasons. First, the growth of the anti-vaccination movement can be pinpointed to

Because of advancements in medicine, vaccinations are becoming a widespread medium in the prevention of disease. They have provided the eradication and immunity to many deadly diseases such as smallpox, polio and rubella. Although there is no law that mandates the vaccination of children, they are necessary to prevent the infliction of disease and harm. By making the decision to vaccinate their children, a parent has the potential to save their lives.

The responsibility to create safe vaccines and drugs for the greater society falls on the drug company. I believe that the drug companies should be liable if something goes wrong with the drugs that they manufacture.

“Prevention is better than cure.” This common statement could not relate any better than it does with the controversy surrounding the morality, effectiveness, and safety of childhood immunizations. The major argument is whether or not laws should be established to declare vaccination mandatory for all children. “The US food and Drug administration (FDA) regulates all vaccines to ensure safety and effectiveness,” (ProCon.org, 2012) therefor there should not be any reason to risk the health of any child. Vaccinating our children not only ensures their safety but also that of their future to come.

Public health officials and vaccine manufacturers should not be allowed to pay for research the vaccine or do the clinical trials. The government should be responsible for safety studies since the taxpayers are paying for the claims. The research should be unbiased with studies that show the negative effect of vaccines on healthy individuals. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) have the greater good of the country at stake and both have an agenda to vaccinate against devastating disease. If the public loses confidence in the vaccines, they would not be vaccinated. Imagine what would happen if the vaccines were unavailable for some reason. All the diseases would reappear and wreak havoc on the medical community (Orfitt 182-185). The manufacturers have reputation and financial gain to consider. If the need for

To fully understand the argument for mandated vaccinations, it is important to understand how different States define the word, “mandate,” and the Supreme Court’s reasoning behind upholding vaccination laws. Many would associate the word “mandate” with an order or command, or something that signifies requirement or inexcusableness, but States’

Vaccinations are one of the single most important things one can do for the health of their children. Although, it has been a subject of recent controversy, the benefits of being vaccinated far outweigh not being vaccinated. Instead of taking medical advice from an actress, or buying into the conspiracy theories that suggest the government is using immunizations in an attempt to poison the population, parents need to spend a little time doing some research on the matter. Vaccinations were developed to preserve human life. If popular opinion concerning immunizations changes, countless illnesses, hospitalizations and even deaths will be prevented. If they do not, we are going to see a spike in needless childhood