The Case Of Mandatory Vaccination

Between 1924 and 2013, vaccinations prevented 103 million cases of polio, measles, rubella, mumps, hepatitis A, diphtheria, and pertussis (Bailey). Vaccinating is “the process by which pathogenic cells are injected into a healthy person in an attempt to cause the body to develop antibodies to a particular virus or bacterium—successful creation of antibodies is referred to as immunity to the disease caused by the particular pathogen” (Introduction to Should Vaccinations be Mandatory). Popular conflicts regarding vaccination include the worry that this form of immunization isn’t natural, the idea that vaccination schedule for children in the U.S. takes away parents’ rights to make decisions for their children, and the concern that vaccinations aren’t safe for all children. Most doctors and scientists advocate for vaccinations in the name of herd immunity, protection against foreign diseases and prevention against pockets of disease outbreaks. Vaccinations should be mandatory for all children in the United States for who they are deemed safe and effective.

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.

Recently an anti-vaccination movement has sparked a worldwide discussion about both the safety of vaccines and the responsibility of people to vaccinate. Recent outbreaks of preventable diseases have caused both fear and anger from people on both sides of the issue. These same outbreaks have also served to cause significant political tension between those against vaccines, who do not want their right to choose compromised, and many proponents of vaccines, who are calling for mandatory vaccinations.

Recent outbreaks of measles and whooping cough have brought the vaccination controversy to the forefront of health safety within the United States. This could be primarily due to the fact the United States has never had a mandatory vaccination policy in effect. Each state has its own immunization policies, which the states govern and regulate. All fifty states do require up-to-date vaccines to attend public schools, including many colleges and universities. There are however, some exemptions granted. A person who opts out of being vaccinated should understand the danger, with a decision that could result in death. Despite the fact that governing of exemptions are not intense enough to justify the liberal use of them, preventing a disease

Ever since the invention of the first smallpox vaccine more than two centuries ago, there has been plenty of controversy over the morality, ethics, effectiveness, and safety of vaccination and immunization. It has recently been argued whether laws should be introduced that render some or all vaccines obligatory for all children (Singer). Parents, health care specialists, nurses, teachers and children all have an important stake in this issue. Parents argue that it is they who should have the ultimate decision-making right on whether or not to vaccinate their children. Nurses and health care officials oppose that view on the grounds that by making vaccination rates in children incomplete, we expose all children to contracting the vaccine-preventable diseases. If this is a risk some parents are willing to take, but others face unwillingly, there is obviously a propitious platform for debate. It is in fact irresponsible and a violation of good citizen when parents oppose vaccinating their children. It is important to unify certain rules related to vaccination and not make it the prerogative of a particular public or private school to decide whether or not to accept an unvaccinated child. It would only be right to end all debate by passing a binding country-wide law to make certain vaccines (against

Today, thanks to state laws that required all children to be immunized before attending school, there aren’t many unvaccinated adults. However, there are individuals who still believe that vaccinations are not effective and may cause adverse effects. Although public health history has demonstrated the immense benefit of vaccines, compulsory vaccination is still not free of controversy. Thus, some states allow medical, religious, and even philosophical exemptions from immunizations (“Disease Eradication”,

One, is distributive justice. Burdens and benefits are not equally distributed when select individuals within a population choose to not get vaccinated. This exercise of autonomy (when not medically indicated) conflicts with the harm principle by placing the health of others in danger. While some anti-vaxxers frame mandatory vaccinations as a liberty issue, the Court ruled in Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), that mandatory vaccination laws are “a legitimate exercise of a state’s police power to protect the public health and safety of its citizens” and is not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment right to liberty. Furthermore, mandatory vaccinations can be justified by utilitarianism. Vaccinating those who are capable of receiving vaccinations maximizes utility by promoting the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people – vaccines are a social good. In assessing the risks and benefits of vaccinations, the good (i.e., beneficence) produced by vaccinations, outweighs the

The term “herd immunity” became a common phrase as the debate surrounding mandating vaccines continues to grow. The modern vaccination debate often appears to focus on the effectiveness of vaccines as many media sources affirmed or denounced a potential correlation between autism and vaccines. Although these stories about autism and vaccines became headlines, the history of mandating vaccines addresses the authority of the government to distinguish between individual concerns and the common good. The current now ultimately focuses on examining the authority of the government to distinguish between individual concerns and the common good rather than the effectiveness of vaccines.

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

Currently, schooling districts in the United States require children to obtain vaccinations parents can enroll them for schooling. In spite of this, many children bypass this requirement by procuring an exemption. At the center of the argument for compulsory vaccination laws lies the desire to keep the population healthy. History has proven vaccines ability to do this, by eradicating deadly childhood diseases such as, smallpox, polio, and measles. I believe that not only are compulsory vaccination laws constitutional, they also serve to maintain public health. In order to argue these points, I used scientific research, United States law, and history, including previous Supreme Court cases.

“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.

More than ever vaccines are met with a high suspicions and very little education on the realities of vaccination success.

To the average individual, the word ‘vaccination’ means to prevent illness. Vaccinations have many advantages; they allow us to be less susceptible to a variety of illnesses and diseases. Many individuals believe that vaccinations should not be mandatory. However, the benefits from vaccinations greatly outweigh the risks from side effects. The judgments are factual and ethical and are supported by testing and research findings from multiple sources.

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’

Imagine two children; one who has been completely vaccinated, and the other has never been vaccinated. Both children fall ill from the same virus, but the child who had been vaccinated fully recovers, while the child who was not passes away due to complications. That child’s life could have been saved if the child received the proper vaccinations. Ever since the invention of the Smallpox vaccine more than two centuries ago, there has been an abundance of controversy over the morality, ethics, effectiveness, and safety of vaccinations and immunizations. It has recently been argued whether laws should be introduced that render some or all vaccines mandatory for all children. Parents, health care specialists, nurses, teachers, and children