1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Government considering compulsory vaccines

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Guest, Sep 29, 2019.

  1. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    One of our neighbours are anti-vaxxers, they are also home-schoolers. It's not about research and knowledge, it's about control and being the ones who make their decisions, not wanting interference from the government and knowing best about everything to do with their family in all matters at all times.

    Oddly enough, they are quite keen on tax credits and child support from the government though.
     
  2. border_walker

    border_walker Lead commenter

    I seem to recall that it is still being used, but the correct isomer.
     
  3. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    Absolutely!!!
     
  4. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    Let's face it.

    The bottom line is that some parents are just too stubborn and stupid to be allowed to have children. However, no general law exists which prevents them from being so, so some parental responsibilities need to be taken away from them.

    Ensuring their children are vaccinated is one such responsibility.
     
  5. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    We could indeed. But ensuring all staff are up to date as are dinner staff, guests to the school and parents is not going to be easy.

    We either have full uptake and the theory is home, or we do not.

    I honestly don't think I would. (Aside from the fact we don't have it)

    I do not believe for one second those choosing not to have their kids vaccinated have not stressed madly over the decision and made one they essentially feel is best for their child.

    That right for parents is paramount.
     
  6. Owennnn

    Owennnn Occasional commenter

    I think the magic number for herd immunity is 95%.

    If we have mandatory vaccination of children, within 10-20 years herd immunity is all but established I reckon.

    The occasional unvaccinated traveller may unwittingly pass on an illness to an extremely unfortunate unvaccinated (medically exempt) child, but in the grand scheme of things herd immunity would hold true.

    You can't shoot down an idea purely because of the possibility it might not work in highly extreme circumstances.
     
  7. Brunel

    Brunel Lead commenter

    The issue is not just with students who may be allergic to a measles vaccine. For students and adults in school with compromised immune systems (as a result of cancer for example) the prospect of getting a disease like measles is literally life-threatening. Non-vaccinating parents may, as Dumpty says, feel they’ve made the best decision for their children (though they’re wrong). It’s undeniable though that their decision is potentially catastrophic to others.
     
  8. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter


    You haven't read the article on 'herd immunity' have you? 100% isn't vital, though as close to it as possible is wise. Start with children...adults who are unvaccinated will, in time, die out...



    I suspect any parent who cared a fig for their children would, if he/she was allergic and unable to be vaccinated.

    Some of those phoning in today who oppose vaccinations may have stressed over it - but unnecessarily because they listened to unscientific nonsense.

    Parents tights are NOT paramount now, as JWs who oppose vital blood transfusions find out.
     
    monicabilongame likes this.
  9. Laphroig

    Laphroig Lead commenter

    BBC2 Vaccine Wars on iPlayer - interesting documentary which addresses the non Vader’s stance.
     
  10. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    I suspect this attitude has been prevalent throughout history. There were probably those who saw nothing wrong with carrying on sh***ing near the village water supply considering it to be their personal choice.

    The law in this country recognises children as people in their own right and not as the property or vassal of their parents. We can choose not to recognise the "right" of parents to make stupid decisions for their children that may be to their detriment.
     
  11. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    As a theory it works well but 95% of all people having all shots and being up to date is unrealistic.

    It says 19 out of 20 need shots to eradicate measles. (Or 95%)

    Again makes me wonder why we cannot just invent a vaccine that works on its own. Would end all of this.

    For selfish reasons yes - but forcing another parent to take their child to be vaccinated against the wishes of the parent is taking it too far, I would say.

    The issue for me is how far do you then take this? It opens a whole can of worms re state control of the masses.
     
  12. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    Again - how far do we go and what decisions are right and wrong plus who will be making them?
     
  13. Owennnn

    Owennnn Occasional commenter

    Some of the most severe illnesses are a single vaccine.

    And we are pretty close to 95% already

    https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-inf...l/nhs-immunisation-statistics/england-2017-18

    Just because its difficult doesn't mean it shouldn't be aspired to.

    "It always seems impossible, until it's done" - N. Mandela

    When the wishes of a parent are affecting the wellbeing of another individual (their own child or someone elses), they cease to be personal choices.

    If I choose to smoke (I don't) that's my choice. If I choose to smoke in a car full of other people, while still being my choice, it's effects are now far more wide ranging.
     
  14. Nellyfuf2

    Nellyfuf2 Senior commenter

    Nomad said
    Because a very small but significant number of people are allergic to one or more of the vaccine constituents such as aluminium, pork gelatin, chicken/egg albumin, formaldehyde, etc.

    Dunno what makes them significant though. What does that mean? Why are they a significant group?

    Oh! I forgot. Who is not allergic to aluminium. Or formaldehyde ? I think we have stopped adding aluminium to vaccines though..... aluminium is digested when we eat foot that contains traces of it. But vaccines go into the blood stream. Babies have immature immune systems and immature brains. They are as a whole, very immature. And if aluminium goes into the blood stream it pops along and says hello to the brain.

    Take nuts. Lots of people (not just cancer recoverers and children with immune diseases) lots of people can die from a slight access to nuts. So we ban nuts right?
    Yup ban nuts.
     
  15. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    The stats gloss over the fact we also know the areas with the highest non uptake rates. I believe (correct me if wrong) this is inner London.

    It appears the MMR vaccine is the one meeting most resistance.


    Re the quotes above, do we know the actual risk as opposed to opinionated risk?

    For example, if MMR uptake is 91% then just how much is that really affecting those unable to be vaccinated in reality?

    And how large is this group (those who cannot take vaccines)?
     
  16. SammyBear2016

    SammyBear2016 Occasional commenter

    I personally don't think that it should be compulsory but education into vaccines is the key. The debunked paper on the MMR vaccine years ago has caused huge problems but i don't believe compulsory vaccination is the answer. There is a lot of negativity on this thread regarding people that chose not to vaccinate their children. In some cases it is down to stupidity but not in all and think it's unfair to class all parents that don't vaccinate or follow a full vaccination programme as stupid, uneducated or wrong.

    My little one has had all but one vaccine. The one that we have opted not to give him was one that i had a really bad reaction to. Although vaccines are generally considered safe there are side effects and unfortunately vaccine reactions can be hereditary. My husband and i considered what we would do regarding this vaccine even whilst i was pregnant, it was not a rash decision. We even spoke to more than one doctor that completely understood our concerns and talked to us about the risk because i had had an issue with it. We did not use doctor google to get our information. I also have a science degree and fully understand how vaccines work and the importance of them.

    If vaccines were made compulsory my little one would have to receive this vaccine or not be allowed to attend school, something that would really concern me. If they made children who are allergic or react to the vaccines exempt they would have had to have the vaccine in the first place to know that there was an issue.
     
  17. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter


    If you fly on a plane and the airline knows someone very allergic to (say) nuts is on board, they won't serve nuts and you won't be allowed to eat any you have with you. And quite right too. There is little or no difference between this and the question of vaccination.

    My proposal - a one way ticket to a deserted island for all non-vaccinators. ;)
     
  18. Owennnn

    Owennnn Occasional commenter

    Or... not compulsory vaccination, but vaccinations required to use state funded schools.

    The issue there is anti-vax parents teaching their children their anti-vax ways.

    If it's all just a personal choice, @dumpty why do we ban certain drugs?
     
  19. Nellyfuf2

    Nellyfuf2 Senior commenter

    Historically it was thought that 85% coverage would be enough to provide pseudo herd immunity. Does anyone know why that changed?
    I do think it should be within the scope of modern medical science to provide an appropriate vaccine programme for that significant group of children that cannot be vaccinated. I would presume that they would like this - for their vulnerable children to be immune? Can that not be done?
    They we wouldn't need all this scare mongering about the monster anti vaxxers putting everyone's lives at risk.

    And then we need to work on the vaccines for scarlet fever and rheumatic fever. There were major killers up to the second world war. There should be vaccines for these illnesses and I cannot for the life of me think why we don't have them.
    It was a leading cause of death in children in the early 20th century.
     
  20. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    Well....is a solution I guess.


    Ah and indeed, how effective is that?

    Take this incentive, it won't stop those most opposed to vaccines playing the system - won't surprise me if we suddenly find the group of those allergic to vaccines quadruples over night.

    We need to work on a vaccine that does not require herd immunity to be effective and try as best we can to work on safe(r)/alternative vaccines for those with allergies.

    How much work is done in these areas?

    How large is this group of allergic to vaccine kids?
     

Share This Page