Parents who refuse to immunise their kids should have their children taken away

[igame]

There are a lot of cases where parents refuse immunisations and/or medical treatments for kids because of their own superstitions and religious beliefs. Some religions do not allow blood transfusion, some believe in natural "medicine" and make belief things like homoeopathy instead of immunisation.

here's an example:
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/par...-1226526103657

Do you think parents who are willing to risk children's lives for their own stupid beliefs should have their kids taken away?
It's been over 50 years since the immunisation regime was implemented and has ever since saved countless lives. If some people still refuse to believe immunisation works, clearly such people are too thick to be trusted to raise the children well !

[jbhasban]

There are a lot of cases where parents refuse immunisations and/or medical treatments for kids because of their own superstitions and religious beliefs. Some religions do not allow blood transfusion, some believe in natural "medicine" and make belief things like homoeopathy instead of immunisation.

here's an example:
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/par...-1226526103657

Do you think parents who are willing to risk children's lives for their own stupid beliefs should have their kids taken away?
It's been over 50 years since the immunisation regime was implemented and has ever since saved countless lives. If some people still refuse to believe immunisation works, clearly such people are too thick to be trusted to raise the children well !

No. Should parents who feed their children fried chicken and cookies have their children taken away? The government should only take away children when the parents are engaging in behavior that is abhorrent to society. We live in a society that values religion. People should have to right to raise their children under these values so long as those values do not cause revulsion in society (declittering young women, for instance).

Failure to immunize ones' children strikes me as stupid but that is simply because I do not share these people's belief system. If I had to choose between suffering through a disease then going to heaven or living for a few extra years and then going to hell for eternity, I would choose going to heaven.

[Jayburner]

homeopathic ...more like homocidal if you ask me.

[Underverse]

Thing is, not immunizing your kids puts EVERYONE else at risk. So it isn't really the same as feeding them cookies and fried chicken....

[LocNess]

Starting off, I would word it better as to not imply you are calling religion stupid.

On top of that, you can't say it is all because of beliefs. There are cases where infants have had bad reactions to immunizations and such that could scare people away from them. People are very protective of their children, and if they don't understand how something works, you cannot blame them sometimes for making decisions that we would consider stupid.

[Silhouette of Seraphim]

Eh, nevermind, can't be bothered.

[the0o]

Because a quack doctor got them believing it causes autism. As a father of a child with autism, i place no blame on the immuniztion because without them, he could have been killed by any number of dieases.


Most schools wont let a child with the proper immuniztion in. If the parents what to home school them, thats fine. watch as they become ill and hospitalize due to a easily treated dieases. some of which could cause lasting effects of there health.

[jbhasban]

homeopathic ...more like homocidal if you ask me.

The body of competent medical evidence would like to contradict your statement. Homeopathic medicine works. So do sugar pills. Unfortunately it is unlawful to proscribe patients sugar pills. However, it is legal to suggest they try homeopathic remedies.

[fizzbob]

i dunno about this, taking the kids away is fucked up since the kids will be put in a system that is VERY fucked up now and gets worse every year. doing nothing risks an outbreak of something (possibly), forcing them to immunize against their will seems like something people would flee england and come to america for in the first place

so i dunno. i guess you could revoke their citizenship and kick them out of the country (kids, parents) but that's expensive to do (some small cities can't afford to kick out known illegal immigrants because each municipality is responsible for deportation and trial costs, which are over $1000 per person even in simple cases)

you can't let them do whatever but you can't make them. i think kicking them out of the country and letting another country deal with them is the only way. if you force immunization on kids, take them from their parents, you just ruin lives. what happens when in 25 years they realize that immunization actually is bad in some way, you then have to deal with lawsuits. in my granddad's lifetime, vaccinations have been the cause of death of MILLIONS of people so it's not far fetched

[jbhasban]

Thing is, not immunizing your kids puts EVERYONE else at risk. So it isn't really the same as feeding them cookies and fried chicken....

Well, obesity puts everyone else at risk. Not to the same degree, mind you. Should we force parents to compliment their peers so their peers have higher self esteems thereby reducing their risk of suicide/depression/eating disorders?

[igame]

No. Should parents who feed their children fried chicken and cookies have their children taken away? The government should only take away children when the parents are engaging in behavior that is abhorrent to society. We live in a society that values religion. People should have to right to raise their children under these values so long as those values do not cause revulsion in society (declittering young women, for instance).

Failure to immunize ones' children strikes me as stupid but that is simply because I do not share these people's belief system. If I had to choose between suffering through a disease then going to heaven or living for a few extra years and then going to hell for eternity, I would choose going to heaven.

How is fried chicken going to infect other kids in playgrounds? or even other people who come in contact with the kids? Imagine if a kid contracts polio. How is that in any way comparable to fried chicken eating?

---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 10:19 PM ----------

Well, obesity puts everyone else at risk. Not to the same degree, mind you. Should we force parents to compliment their peers so their peers have higher self esteems thereby reducing their risk of suicide/depression/eating disorders?

Obesity only puts other at risk if the fat one falls on others

[Lupinemancer]

Which just proves once again, that Religion is the scource of evil in this world, and as long as it exists, true peace can never be achieved


Infracted.

[igame]

Starting off, I would word it better as to not imply you are calling religion stupid.

On top of that, you can't say it is all because of beliefs. There are cases where infants have had bad reactions to immunizations and such that could scare people away from them. People are very protective of their children, and if they don't understand how something works, you cannot blame them sometimes for making decisions that we would consider stupid.

Really in first world? Is anyone here frojm a first world country where a woman can not get free advice from a MD Doctor about the benefits of immunisation for the baby? Also, doctors know there can be allergic reactions and are prepared to tackle them. If parents are that [protective then same is true for walking down the street, people do get kille don roads all the time.
Denying a child immunisation is cruel, exposing an innocent child to things like polio is nothing short of barbaric.

---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 10:24 PM ----------

Which just proves once again, that Religion is the scource of evil in this world, and as long as it exists, true peace can never be achieved

While I whole heartedly agree with your sentiment, a lot fo times it's the hippie voodoo crap like neuropathology and homoeopathy.

[jbhasban]

How is fried chicken going to infect other kids in playgrounds? or even other people who come in contact with the kids? Imagine if a kid contracts polio. How is that in any way comparable to fried chicken eating?

I, as a parent who does not immunize his kids (hypothetical), do not have a legal duty to those children. My kids, by getting a disease by accident and spreading it, have not been negligent in causing those kids to be diseased. You may have a point if I were to send my kid to be with other kids when I suspect that my kid is sick, but you are suggesting that having my kid around other kids is somehow negligent in itself. By that standard, being obese and nonathletic makes your immune system weak. Having a weak immune system increases the risk that you will develop a disease. Your developing the disease makes it more likely that someone will be infected by the disease.

BTW, if the other kids are immunized against a disease, they really are not likely to get sick from my kid having that disease.

Also, please start spelling it "immunization" if you want to have an intelligent conversation. Thanks.

[LocNess]

Really in first world? Is anyone here frojm a first world country where a woman can not get free advice from a MD Doctor about the benefits of immunisation for the baby? Also, doctors know there can be allergic reactions and are prepared to tackle them. If parents are that [protective then same is true for walking down the street, people do get kille don roads all the time.
Denying a child immunisation is cruel, exposing an innocent child to things like polio is nothing short of barbaric.

You have to remember that the average person is ignorant and gullible. People are sheep.

[jbhasban]

Really in first world? Is anyone here frojm a first world country where a woman can not get free advice from a MD Doctor about the benefits of immunisation for the baby? Also, doctors know there can be allergic reactions and are prepared to tackle them. If parents are that [protective then same is true for walking down the street, people do get kille don roads all the time.
Denying a child immunisation is cruel, exposing an innocent child to things like polio is nothing short of barbaric.

---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 10:24 PM ----------



While I whole heartedly agree with your sentiment, a lot fo times it's the hippie voodoo crap like neuropathology and homoeopathy.

Neuropathology? Are you suggesting neurologists are quacks?

[Jayburner]

I, as a parent who does not immunize his kids (hypothetical), do not have a legal duty to those children. My kids, by getting a disease by accident and spreading it, have not been negligent in causing those kids to be diseased. You may have a point if I were to send my kid to be with other kids when I suspect that my kid is sick, but you are suggesting that having my kid around other kids is somehow negligent in itself. By that standard, being obese and nonathletic makes your immune system weak. Having a weak immune system increases the risk that you will develop a disease. Your developing the disease makes it more likely that someone will be infected by the disease.

BTW, if the other kids are immunized against a disease, they really are not likely to get sick from my kid having that disease.

Also, please start spelling it "immunization" if you want to have an intelligent conversation. Thanks.

maybe the op is english or australian or perhaps canadian?

[Trubo]

There are a lot of cases where parents refuse immunisations and/or medical treatments for kids because of their own superstitions and religious beliefs. Some religions do not allow blood transfusion, some believe in natural "medicine" and make belief things like homoeopathy instead of immunisation.

here's an example:
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/par...-1226526103657

Do you think parents who are willing to risk children's lives for their own stupid beliefs should have their kids taken away?
It's been over 50 years since the immunisation regime was implemented and has ever since saved countless lives. If some people still refuse to believe immunisation works, clearly such people are too thick to be trusted to raise the children well !

No. While an argument for immunizations against older diseases such as Polio have some weight arguing for them, newer immunizations do not necessarily have enough evidence to show that they are effective. That is to say, the number of people who did not contract the disease due to the immunization outweighed the number of people who contracted the disease because of being introduced to the disease via the immunization. Another thing you need to consider is the cost of some of the most recent immunization shots with and without a health plan stipend (loathe to say insurance as I disagree with what most people would say is insurance but that is unrelated to the topic).

[jbhasban]

maybe the op is english or australian or perhaps canadian?

I wasn't aware of the different spelling. I assumed from his overall inability to type correctly and his hyperbolic speech he was simply spelling it incorrectly.

Infracted: Please do not post just to correct or insult other people's grammar.

[RoKPaNda]

No, I don't think they should have their children taken away. I think that schools should just not accept children who aren't properly immunized and if the parents refuse to immunize their children I think they should be provided with reliable information on the safety of immunizations and sent on their way. If they're adamant about refusing to immunize their children then they should just have to home school their children or send their children to private schools that allow such things and cope with the added costs and other issues that should arise.

While not having immunizations COULD be detrimental to the child and other children the chance of that is very small, even in comparison to the small number of children who don't get the immunizations, but the number of children that would have to be re-homed would be massive. We already have a problem with having too many children in the system and no where to put them. I'm more interested in seeing children who are at high risk / in danger / abused be placed in better homes than see families broken up and children taken away with nowhere to go over a chance that they could possibly become infected with something.

While I whole heartedly agree with your sentiment, a lot fo times it's the hippie voodoo crap like neuropathology and homoeopathy.

Odd, even the most secular of nations on the planet seem to disagree with his viewpoint.