Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

UK Court Orders Two Sisters Must Receive MMR Vaccine

samzenpus posted 1 year,8 days | from the protecting-the-herd dept.

United Kingdom 699

rnws writes "The BBC reports that an English High Court judge has ruled that sisters aged 15 and 11 must have the MMR vaccine even though they and their mother do not want it. The High Court decision, made last month, came after the girls' father brought a case seeking vaccination. When outlining her decision in the latest case, Mrs Justice Theis emphasized it was a specific case 'only concerned with the welfare needs of these children', but lawyers say as one of a series it confirms there is no longer any debate about the benefits of the vaccine."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good. (4, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117217)

"The BBC reports that an English High Court judge has ruled that sisters aged 15 and 11 must have the MMR vaccine even though they and their mother do not want it. "

No, the kids don't know any better, and the mother is practicing child abuse, especially against the 11 year old.

Brainwashing your kids against vaccination is particularly evil.

--
BMO

Re:Good. (4, Insightful)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117237)

Find me a kid that wants to get shots. Of course they're going to be against it. But yeah, it's sad this very dangerous idea is still floating around, all because somebody wanted to get money from an alternative vaccine and thus fabricated a lie.

Re: Good. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117417)

Me. (When I was kid).
Never disliked/feared needles. Quite the contrary. I was always very excited.

Re:Good. (3, Interesting)

Pseudonym (62607) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117565)

Find me a kid that wants to get shots.

Both of my kids, when they were in the age range 4-7. Neither were scared of needles, and the doctor gives you a jelly bean.

Re:Good. (1)

Xicor (2738029) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117599)

i hated needles as a kid, and STILL hate needles. i almost never get anything with a needle unless i absolutely have to. ill generally take the flu over a vaccine.

Re:Good. (1)

Jarik C-Bol (894741) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117659)

I went through a weird stage between the ages of roughly 7 and say, 16 where I was extremely uncomfortable with needles. Then I had to get a lot of blood drawn for some tests, and something just clicked, and I was like "this is no big deal. Sure, its uncomfortable, but its not really scary". It was a good time for it to happen to, because the nurse that was taking my blood was semi-incompitant or something, and had to stab me about 30 times to get a vein.

Re:Good. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117703)

I went through a weird stage between the ages of roughly 7 and say, 16 where I was extremely uncomfortable with needles. Then I had to get a lot of blood drawn for some tests, and something just clicked, and I was like "this is no big deal. Sure, its uncomfortable, but its not really scary". It was a good time for it to happen to, because the nurse that was taking my blood was semi-incompitant or something, and had to stab me about 30 times to get a vein.

The best trick with kids, especially boys, is to take a friend of theirs when it's time to get a shot. They'll want to look tough in front of the friend, so no freaking out, no crying. Once they've been through it once without acting like the world is going to end they have that something click which you're describing. From that point on, you don't the friend anymore, it won't be a big deal.

Re:Good. (1)

AK Marc (707885) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117679)

I never hated needles until I had an appendectomy at age 12. They couldn't get the needle in me. 10 tries by 3 people until I was wired for surgery. It hurt. I've never liked them since then.

Re:Good. (5, Insightful)

unitron (5733) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117689)

i hated needles as a kid, and STILL hate needles. i almost never get anything with a needle unless i absolutely have to. ill generally take the flu over a vaccine.

Then you've probably never really had the flu.

Oh, and before you wound up completely out of action for a week except to grab the trash can near the bed when your stomach tries to turn itself inside out and escape your body via your throat, and you have spasms in abodmen muscles you never knew you had, you've probably helped spread the disease to who knows how many others.

Do like I do, look the other way and accept that there's going to be some momentary pain.

Re: Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117779)

Yeah, you're the norm.

Re:Good. (-1, Offtopic)

Cryacin (657549) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117249)

Interesting that they are enforcing vaccines, and yet if you look at the NHS these days, "Pregnancy is not an Illness", ergo, you need almost no medical care to give birth, in fact, you are encouraged to give birth at home.

It will be interesting to see what the statistics on mortality will be for the children/mothers over the coming years.

But hey, at least they'll be vaccinated. That's a plus!

Re:Good. (2)

b1scuit (795301) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117307)

Pregnancy isn't an illness.

Re:Good. (4, Insightful)

besalope (1186101) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117487)

Pregnancy isn't an illness.

Exactly. It's just a parasitic relationship.

Re:Good. (1)

r1348 (2567295) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117619)

Then all forms of sexual reproduction are.

Re:Good. (2)

Forbo (3035827) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117725)

I thought it was common knowledge that life is a terminal, sexually transmitted disease.

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117311)

read the fucking summary...they are not enforcing the vaccination, the father is

Re:Good. (1, Informative)

Entropius (188861) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117327)

Home birth is quite safe in all but high-risk cases, and we know which ones those are.

Being unvaccinated is not.

Re:Good. (2)

quantumghost (1052586) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117691)

Home birth is quite safe in all but high-risk cases, and we know which ones those are.

Several Ob-Gyns I know are fond of noting:

You can't expect 21st century outcomes with 18th century ambiance.

Caveat Emptor.

Re:Good. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117337)

I don't know, man. Pregnancy is listed under "Conditions" [www.nhs.uk] , they advice you should NOT have your first child at home [www.nhs.uk] , and they provide a mid-wife TO YOUR HOME if you decide to give birth at home.

What are you going on again? Any links?

Re:Good. (3, Informative)

jklovanc (1603149) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117373)

NHS these days, "Pregnancy is not an Illness", ergo, you need almost no medical care to give birth

Do you have any references for that leap? I looked it up and the references I have found to that phrase is in literature like this [rcplondon.ac.uk] .

Pregnancy is not an illness and the majority of women remain well throughout their pregnancy. In fact, research shows that most women who work are healthier during their pregnancy than those who do not work.

It is about the ability to work while pregnant and has nothing o do with the level of care during delivery.

you are encouraged to give birth at home.

According to this NHS page [www.nhs.uk] the choice is up to the parent. It looks like they give a pretty balanced picture of the choice between the options.

Re:Good. (0)

wisnoskij (1206448) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117539)

Well statistically you would expect the deaths to go way down, as modern hospitals have far higher rates of child and mother mortality than non hospital deliveries.

Re:Good. (3, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117607)

Well statistically you would expect the deaths to go way down, as modern hospitals have far higher rates of child and mother mortality than non hospital deliveries.

Apples and oranges.

With a few unfortunate exceptions, home births are low risk births which are really pretty safe with routine medical care (that can be delivered at home). So you don't expect any deaths / bad outcomes (but they happen).

Hospital births include low risk and high risk deliveries. Some of the latter don't do well even with the best medical care. So, no you cannot statistically compare the two unless you are very careful to tell us just what exactly you are comparing.

Re:Good. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117295)

As apposed to brainwashing your kids to be FOR vaccination?

Or brainwashing your kids against murder? Or brainwashing your kids to be fiscally responsible, eat their veggies, and do their homework before playing?

Re:Good. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117343)

Brainwashing your kids against vaccination is particularly evil.

You are confusing your narrow minded opinion with fact, which
your opinion most certainly is not.

The history of medicine is chock full of examples of situations
which were once thought to be good ideas and later were viewed
in the cold light of reason as very bad ideas indeed.

Your arrogance is appalling, unless you are 12 years old, in which
case it is about what should be expected from an ignorant child.

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117413)

Did this garbage seriously get modded up? Really?

Re:Good. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117627)

Did this garbage seriously get modded up? Really?

What's the matter, does your little butt hurt ?

No one cares what you think. And if your post is any indication,
you don't think much anyway.

Re:Good. (4, Insightful)

ATMAvatar (648864) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117445)

You are more than welcome to publish a paper in a medical journal disproving the health benefits of vaccination and herd immunity. Until such revolutionary change comes about in medicine, choosing not to vaccinate a child *is* particularly evil, as it endangers not only the child but everyone around him or her. Teaching the child not to vaccinate only exacerbates the problem.

Re:Good. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117571)

Exactly like the idiots showing up sick at work and making others (especially those who are weaker) sick - the original person does it to avoid a few days without pay - and then causes someone else to take 2 weeks off sick.

Selfish people are everywhere :/

Re:Good. (2)

zippthorne (748122) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117683)

To be fair, the contagious period and the visible symptoms period don't necessarily overlap enough for it to matter - by the time you're symptomatic enough to realize you should stay home, you might have already infected your coworkers.

I blame workplaces that are stingy with sick-time and work-from-home time. (especially work-from-home time. Lots of things you could be sick with that you don't want to spread, but you're not impaired enough where you want to sit around doing nothing and getting behind. (and being bored...))

Re:Good. (2)

umdesch4 (3036737) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117379)

I just got over a nasty case of shingles, was completely out of commission for a couple weeks. It was every bit as terrible as you might have heard. I wouldn't wish that kind of agonizing pain on my worst enemy. If the court wants to convince these kids to get the shot, send them to me, and I'll tell them all about it and send pictures.

Re:Good. (2)

eis2718bob (659933) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117595)

Funny that the rise in shingles cases has occurred since varicella vaccination became common.

What's changed is that there is no longer a large amount of chicken pox virus floating around the community, constantly challenging folks' immune systems. To get exposed you now have to go to a doctor and buy it. (This is the "shingles vaccine".)

For many diseases, such as polio and measles, vaccination is undoubtedly a huge good, preventing a huge number of deaths and tragic illness. But for varicella, the vaccine may result in more harm than good.

Re:Good. (1)

mrbester (200927) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117617)

Shingles is a variant of chicken pox and you can get it as an adult even if you had chicken pox (or when had a vaccination) as a child.

I had measles, mumps, rubella (was generally called German measles back then) and chicken pox as a child. This was before the vaccines were available. I wouldn't advise catching them "naturally", but I also don't like the mental picture of a child being restrained and being stabbed with a hypodermic by order of a court.

Re:Good. (1)

mrbester (200927) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117625)

s/when/even

Re:Good. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117535)

"The medical establishment has decided vaccination is good, no exceptions"

FUCK YOU.

Re:Good. (-1)

diamondmagic (877411) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117569)

This isn't about vaccinations being good or bad. What they think the vaccination will do is irrelevant.

This is about your right to decide what goes into your own body, to keep the government away from it.

Re:Good. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117661)

Society would be better off if you did not procreate.

Re:Good. (-1)

anomaly256 (1243020) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117669)

Exactly. Having a government department decide that you are to be forced to have a corporation-manufactured product injected into your body is orders of magnitude more dangerous than either any potential side effect from the vaccination on the individual or the danger to the community from the individual not being vaccinated. I can't understand why both the pro-vaccination group and a lot of the anti-vaccination group fail to see this argument. Would I get vaccinated or let my children be vaccinated? If the threat was real enough, yes. But would I let a government make that decision for me/them? Hell no. I'd start killing people long before submitting to that tyranny.

Re:Good. (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117775)

But would I let a government make that decision for me/them? Hell no. I'd start killing people long before submitting to that tyranny.

RTFS the government didnt make that decision, the father did. The father just used a court to force the mother to do it, the father brought suit against the mother not the government.

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117717)

Actually, it's about your right to decide what goes into your child's body. Actually it's about favouring one parent's preference for that over the other parent's preference. Actually it's about social responsibility and herd immunity. Actually, it's about lots of things, and life isn't simple.

Re:Good. (1)

AK Marc (707885) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117727)

The Father wanted to vaccinate his children. The Mother didn't want it. This is about the government mediating a dispute.

Re:Good. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117589)

...the mother is practicing child abuse, especially against the 11 year old.

I actually do medical research for a living. One of the things that continues to surprise me is how much there is that we don't know about (preventing) infectious diseases. Of course, some topics (e.g. the human immune system) are incredibly difficult and it will be many decades before we have anything approaching a solid understanding. But I also see a lot of low hanging fruit - where the technology now exists to answer some important questions - but where there's not a whole lot actually being done.

And, as far as I can tell, the main limitation is money: if some government or other were to wade in and say "Here's a trillion dollars (i.e., the cost of the Iraq war), now go out and get some answers - then it would actually be possible to get some answers".

For example, let's say we really believe that this "herd immunity" thing is important - that we want as much as possible of our population to be immune to the measles. Well, how long does the effect of the vaccination last? Should we also be (re)vaccinating adults. And, if so, how often? And And what about early detection? Could we simply put up a "measles detector" in every school so that when some kid walks in the door shedding infectious measles viruses then the alarm goes off and the kid can be quarantined?

And what about diseases which are not well controlled by vaccines - e.g. colds, flu, tuberculosis. Can we understand more about how they are transmitted? Suppose someone with the flu sneezes in a crowded subway car , or nightclub, or classroom, etc. What fraction of the surrounding people will breathe in the aerosoled virus particles and get sick?

You'd think that by now science would have a clear answer to these kinds of questions. After all, they're basic questions affecting the health of most of the people on the planet. And I don't want to imply that there's been no research whatsoever on these topics. But what's surprising to me is that there hasn't been enough research to really settle the matter. There's still a lot of uncertainty even among serious scientists.

So, yeah, it's "child abuse" if one lttle girl somewhere doesn't get a measles vaccine. But what about all those ultra-rich investment bankers who couldn't possibly afford to pay more tax to fund the research that would actually answer these questions? Or what about the average slashdotter? So you think this infectious disease stuff is important? Well, how much have you donated yourself in support of such research? Or, when it comes right down to it, maybe you don't believe in science yourself? You don't believe that the knowledge gained from more scientific research would actually reduce the incidence of infectious disease in the world?

Re:Good. (1)

AK Marc (707885) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117733)

And, as far as I can tell, the main limitation is money: if some government or other were to wade in and say "Here's a trillion dollars (i.e., the cost of the Iraq war), now go out and get some answers - then it would actually be possible to get some answers".

It's all about luck. Money buys more chances, but no guarantees. I don't know anyone that guarantees a cure for cancer for a trillion dollars, but nobody would turn it down.

Re:Good. (0)

bmo (77928) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117745)

I'm replying here, because I'm telling you that you're an idiot and your wall-of-text is basically meaningless. This "I'm only asking questions" bullshit doesn't cut it. Your post is both fact and content-free.

--
BMO

Re:Good. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117671)

Tires inevitably[url=http://www.go4sporting.com]carbon road wheel[/url]will need a burst of air to stay properly inflated.

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117695)

tell me then, whats in that needle??

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117769)

Fascist liberal. Leave them alone. If they die, then so be it, but at least they have a choice. Your view is Marxist in its finest form. It's will be the downfall of the US.

Finally killed that autism theory? (5, Interesting)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117221)

I hope so, I don't know why so many people heard of one study, which was proved false, and not the others which disproved it.

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (5, Insightful)

felixrising (1135205) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117255)

That is because rumours only spread when they are in the affirmation, not a negation, ie.. "someone said 'x' is related to 'y'" will spread word of mouth, whilst "someone said 'x' is NOT related to 'y'" will not spread.

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (4, Insightful)

bunratty (545641) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117457)

The rumor X is not related to Y will spread if there is people get emotional gratification out of it. If people believe they need to change their lifestyle to prevent global warming, then they are very eager to believe that "the warming is not related to burning fossil fuels."

Ironically, changing our lifestyle is one of the least effective ways to reduce use of fossil fuels. We just need to get our energy from other sources and we can keep our comfy lifestyle.

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (5, Insightful)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117265)

One side of the story has a spokesidiot who is blond with big tits. Apparently that supersedes scientific study.

.
PS. Firefox underlined 'spokesidiot' with a red squiggly line. So I added the word to the dictionary.

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117545)

One side of the story has a spokesidiot who is blond with big tits.

Pictures?

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (4, Funny)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117621)

http://www.foxnews.com/images/385241/3_21_ape450.jpg [foxnews.com]

NSFW: Shows nipplage.

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117707)

come on, it should be NSFL

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (1)

ATMAvatar (648864) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117771)

Spokesbunny sums it up in one word :)

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117271)

I hope so, I don't know why so many people heard of one study, which was proved false, and not the others which disproved it.

Welcome to Planet Earth, you must be new here.

Extravagant simplistic lies make for a better (more memorable and interesting) story than a boring or complex truth.

This truth is amplified by the echo chamber of the media (fear sells because it is more 'interesting' than mundane realities).

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (0)

bunratty (545641) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117323)

People tend to perceive only information that fits their preconceptions. It's called cognitive dissonance.

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (3, Informative)

kipling (24579) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117557)

s/cognitive dissonance/confirmation bias/

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (0)

AK Marc (707885) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117759)

Confirmation bias may be a form of cognitive dissonance, making both correct.

Re:Finally killed that autism theory? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117699)

using a bicycle air pump to re-inflate[url=http://www.go4sporting.com]bike wheelsets[/url]the tires typically takes only a couple of minutes and requires no special expertise.

children have no rights (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117239)

foreskin fibroblast for sale(anti-aging face cream)...not exactly how i envisioned my dick on your face

my wife works as a medical technician (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117277)

and she has seen perfectly healthy people die solely as a result of receiving the vaccine.

in this case if adverse effects happen to these girls, the judge needs to be prosecuted.

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (4, Insightful)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117293)

I think you will find that more people die from the preventable disease than die from the vaccine.

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117581)

The only link that I found between the NNR vaccine and death is in Japan [wikipedia.org] . The issue is that they administered expired vaccines and their vaccine used the Urabe strain which is not used in the UK.

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (2)

csumpi (2258986) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117313)

bullshit. thanks for kindling the fud and feeding the idiots.

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117325)

Using the same logic, should anyone that these three un-vaccinated people come remotely close to have adverse health effects, all three should be prosecuted. The needs of the many outweigh the wishes of the few.

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117567)

The needs of the many outweigh the wishes of the few.

aka Tyranny

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (1)

AK Marc (707885) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117793)

aka Democracy. Why do you hate democracy?

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (2)

bunratty (545641) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117329)

Ah, the perfect is the enemy of the good. Thousands die and are injured in traffic accidents every day, and yet I bet you ride in a car or other form of transportation regularly anyway.

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117371)

and she has seen perfectly healthy people die solely as a result of receiving the vaccine.

in this case if adverse effects happen to these girls, the judge needs to be prosecuted.

If she isn't doing anything to get this out, she will be responsible for more. If you're not advising she does something then you will be responsible as well.

Re:my wife works as a medical technician (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117439)

References? What was the rate? Also perfectly healthy people have died after contracting measles, mumps or rubella.

Too old for autism (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117281)

Aren't they too old to become autistic from a vaccine?

Sensible decision (4, Insightful)

mynamestolen (2566945) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117283)

You don't drive through red traffic lights. You don't spread your stupid diseases to innocent Children who for GOOD reasons can't be vaccinated. And you don't waste my taxes trying to treat your sick kids because you're too stupid to understand some basic science.

Re:Sensible decision (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117721)

you forgot to add, and people who refuse MMR vaccination should get a free two week vacation to India

Re:Sensible decision (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117731)

You don't drive through red traffic lights.

Where I live, a red light apparently means "only three more get to go".

Actually sensable.... (5, Insightful)

MasseKid (1294554) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117315)

Dad and mom do not agree, kids are minors and thus unable to decide for themselves in the eyes of the law, and thus medical evidence breaks the tie. I really don't see the problem here...

IF mom and dad and kids didn't want it and courts were ordering something, then that would be a different story.

It's unfortunate. (3, Insightful)

BitterOak (537666) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117333)

It's unfortunate they made the issue out to be the efficacy of the vaccine and not the moral implications about forcing medication on people against their will. I, like most, believe the autism-MMR link is pure nonsense, but I do believe it must be every person's right to refuse medical treatment, including vaccines. (In the case of children, parents sometimes need to make decisions on their behalf, of course, but it shouldn't be the government making those decisions.) Of course, an exception to that rule can be made if people want the privilege of traveling to certain foreign countries which are known to harbor specific diseases, but otherwise, it should be up to parents, or adults to make these decisions, wrong though they may be.

Re:It's unfortunate. (4, Insightful)

bunratty (545641) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117367)

You may want to read about herd immunity. We need a certain percentage of the population to be vaccinated to protect everyone against the disease, including those who cannot have the vaccination. Leaving it up to everyone to decide for themselves what they want to do won't work. We don't let people decide what side of the road to drive on, now do we?

Re:It's unfortunate. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117449)

Just like it's illegal to drive on the wrong side of the road, sodomy must be criminalized to vastly decrease the herd prevalence of HIV. Winner of the Nobel Prize in medicine: the Bible.

Re:It's unfortunate. (1)

mysidia (191772) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117573)

We don't let people decide what side of the road to drive on, now do we?

Indeed we do not. And we could make a law requiring people carry around proof of the proper immunizations when on public property, or when driving a car.

Perhaps, that sort of thing would settle this ridiculous anti-vaccine matter:

In order to obtain a driver's license, you must show proof of MMR vaccination; or proof of a medical condition contraindicating vaccination, with a record of vaccination received or condition excluding vaccination beginning at least 10 years before the date of license application.

Require a similar thing of employers.

In other words: add lots of "required proof of vaccination" to receive many government and private services, so it would be unthinkable for parents to commit this abuse.

Re:It's unfortunate. (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117643)

Herd immunity still doesn't trump individual control of their body (at least IMHO). First, herd immunity is imperfect, secondly unvaccinated persons are rare thus making the argument even less cogent.

It's always about competing rights - your individual right to self determination and society's right to be as safe as possible. It's pretty clear that people driving randomly down a road in both directions causes great harm and offers little individual benefits, but the same cannot be said for vaccinations.

Personally, I feel that if you don't get vaccinated against pretty much anything you can get vaccinated against, you're an idiot. But I support your right to be an idiot as long as it doesn't interfere with me.

Re:It's unfortunate. (1)

BitterOak (537666) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117743)

You may want to read about herd immunity. We need a certain percentage of the population to be vaccinated to protect everyone against the disease, including those who cannot have the vaccination. Leaving it up to everyone to decide for themselves what they want to do won't work. We don't let people decide what side of the road to drive on, now do we?

Yes, I've heard of "herd immunity", but I don't believe people should be treated like cattle. And I don't believe it's right to force a medical procedure on someone for the good of someone else. Thank God I live in America. I chose to get vaccinated, but it was MY choice (and my parent's choice when I was a child.)

Re:It's unfortunate. (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117385)

Parents do not have absolute rights over their children's treatment. I imagine every court in the industrialized world has had to deal with Jehovah's Witnesses who don't meant their child to have blood transfusions. A strong argument can similarily made for vaccines, in that the child's wellbeing overrides the parents' wishes our beliefs.

Re:It's unfortunate. (5, Informative)

avandesande (143899) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117395)

You missed the part about the father wanting the kids vaccinated.

Re:It's unfortunate. (4, Insightful)

jhealy1024 (234388) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117469)

What about the case of public health? Vaccines rely on "herd immunity" to be effective, so letting everyone pick and choose leads to a situation where not enough people are vaccinated to protect the population as a whole (as seen by outbreaks of measles in pockets of the country over the last year). There was an article written on this (which I can't find now) that was a great overview of the tension between one's individual rights to liberty and one's societal obligations not to kill people by willfully refusing something that has been demonstrated to work.

What if, for example, we found the "typhoid mary" for measles (someone who was asymptomatic, but carried the disease and spread it to others). They could be cured with the vaccine, but refuse to take it. Should the interest of the public health outweigh the individual right to refuse treatment in this case? If not, why should others perish? If so, then why not force vaccines on everyone? Where should the line be drawn?

Here in the US, we typically coerce vaccination by making it a prerequisite for public school (some states allow "personal" or "religious" exemptions, though). That way, people aren't "forced" to do it; life is just more unpleasant if they insist on skipping vaccines. Not sure if the UK has a similar system to encourage vaccination.

Re:It's unfortunate. (1)

rollingcalf (605357) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117493)

In this case, the father wanted them to get the vaccine but the mother didn't. The parents disagreed, the court broke the tie, it didn't impose its will against both parents.

Re:It's unfortunate. (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117501)

In the case of children, parents sometimes need to make decisions on their behalf,

The parents are making the decision. The problem is that the parents are split on that decision and the court weighed in to break the tie.

Men's rights (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117507)

This is actually a case about father's rights, RTFA

Re:It's unfortunate. (5, Informative)

wisnoskij (1206448) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117517)

But that was not the issue here.
Half of their legal guardians wanted them to get the vaccine, and the other half did not want it. The kids had picked a side, but were too young for their opinion to matter.
So, in the end either the court could of just said, "well we cannot decide for you", or it could take the role of a third child guardian, and base their decision on the medical science.

Re:It's unfortunate. (3, Informative)

mysidia (191772) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117533)

It's unfortunate they made the issue out to be the efficacy of the vaccine and not the moral implications about forcing medication on people against their will. I, like most, believe the autism-MMR link is pure nonsense, but I do believe it must be every person's right to refuse medical treatment, including vaccines

I agree that there must be some limited right for an individual to refuse a medical treatment that might be harmful to them.

However: the parents have the authority to force their children to undergo medical operations for the benefit of the child; their child not being of sound mind, is deemed incapable of refusing treatment for themself.

The two parents are in disagreement ---- think of this as more a parental rights issue; one of the parents demands their child be vaccinated for their protection and long life; the other parent has decided they object to their child receiving the vaccine based on some bogus hearsay about vaccines causing autism or other bad things.

The parents cannot resolve the matter amongst their selves, therefore: the court has to step in to settle the dispute between the two parents, and ensure the child's welfare is protected.

Re:It's unfortunate. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117547)

Try to keep up. The parents disagreed and children don't get a say. I think this post [slashdot.org] hit the nail on the head.

Pubic health (2)

SuperBanana (662181) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117623)

I do believe it must be every person's right to refuse medical treatment, including vaccines.

If you've got an infectious disease that has outbreak potential, most legal systems allow doctors to detain you for treatment.

This isn't the same thing, but there's a similar public health factor. It's not a personal decision, given that there are people who CANNOT be vaccinated for whatever reason, and some of these diseases have no "cure" other than prevention.

Most of these outbreaks happen when unvaccinated people travel to other countries where vaccinations aren't commonplace and the diseases are. And they bring it home. That's half the reason your doctor and the Embassy suggest/strongly recommend getting booster shots before traveling to certain places!

Re:It's unfortunate. (1)

flimflammer (956759) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117687)

The father in this case IS making the decision for his kids. He just needed the law on his side because his ex-wife has terrified their kids about what being vaccinated means.

Kids don't like vaccination?! (4, Insightful)

Arancaytar (966377) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117381)

even though they and their mother do not want it

Well duh. I didn't want shots either, but luckily for me my parents were sane people and didn't let a ten-year-old make medical decisions.

Re:Kids don't like vaccination?! (1)

Trepidity (597) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117483)

Generally true, though the tricky part is that in disagreements between divorced parents, courts sometimes try to take the kids' wishes into account in ways that wouldn't have legal standing outside the divorce context. That's because the court is supposed to do many things in the "interest of the children", and when divorced parents disagree over what that is, they might try to discern from the children what that is (with varying degrees of success).

Here the court seems to have taken the children's wishes into account, but ultimately decided that, when mom and dad disagreed over what was in the interests of the children, medical science was a better tie-breaker.

The needs of the many... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117429)

Outweigh the needs of the few.

confirms there is no longer any debate (2)

wisnoskij (1206448) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117477)

"confirms there is no longer any debate about the benefits of the vaccine."

How can anyone be stupid enough to believe that a judge ruling has any effect on medical science?

Re:confirms there is no longer any debate (1)

mysidia (191772) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117597)

How can anyone be stupid enough to believe that a judge ruling has any effect on medical science?

It doesn't really matter; as there's no real debate over the benefits in the first place.

It's like saying "The court says the sky is blue; therefore, this confirms there is no longer any debate that 1 + 1 = 2."

Re:confirms there is no longer any debate (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117741)

"confirms there is no longer any debate about the benefits of the vaccine."

There's no longer any debate about a lot of things.

Except... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117635)

Regardless of the benefits of vaccines, it's the place of the parent or patient to decide. If one parent does and one doesn't, that's a custody battle in the making.

If the patient doesn't want it then they don't get it. That's the essence of freedom, to decide for oneself.

Immunization (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117785)

I auction off the right of a nurse that I work with to finally get the chance to inflict pain upon me in retribution for all of the other times I have made life difficult... There is a lineup every year!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?