SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the when-you-can't-make-them-see-the-light dept.
The Center for American Progress reports
The anti-vaccine sentiments that originated with a [completely] discredited British study linking the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) shot to autism have made their way to other western countries like Australia.
According to the government agency that tracks Australia's childhood vaccination rates, the rate of kids going without their shots has doubled over the past decade.
[...]Australia has announced an aggressive new approach in this area: Cutting off government benefits to parents who refuse to inoculate their children.
Under the proposal, parents who claim philosophical objections to vaccines will no longer be eligible for welfare payments and childcare rebates that can equal up to $11,500 per child in American dollars. Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced the policy change on Sunday, although it still has to be approved by Parliament.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Tuesday April 14 2015, @10:07AM
Why not choose something that will impact everyone equally and actually be a relevant consideration. For example, no school enrollment (public or private) without the vaccinations.
Since I'm pretty sure that being unvaccinated presents no particular risks in receiving social welfare payments, but attending school unvaccinated is certainly an issue.
(Score: 4, Informative) by khallow on Tuesday April 14 2015, @10:26AM
Why not choose something that will impact everyone equally and actually be a relevant consideration.
They did.
For example, no school enrollment (public or private) without the vaccinations.
How does that inconvenience the wealthy person equally? They can still enroll their children in schools outside of Australia or home tutor them.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Tuesday April 14 2015, @04:29PM
Arguably, that actually would address the issue if they're sent out of country or kept inside.
Though good luck crossing borders without your shots.
(Score: 1) by Ox0000 on Tuesday April 14 2015, @11:43AM
Why not choose something that will impact everyone equally and actually be a relevant consideration. For example, no school enrollment (public or private) without the vaccinations.
"X percent of your total net worth or total yearly expenditure(1) for your family (2) and any and all dependents, whichever is greater; levied per annum at tax time for every year in non-compliance (3)"
(1) so that you can't hide your assets thus lowering your total net worth
(2) so that it's not possible to move all your assets to your vaccinating friend and have them buy food and housing and clothes for you
(3) so that it's not possible to move your assets out of your control or 'live a simpler/cheaper life' for a year and thus dodge the punishment
There, how hard was this? When do I get elected to congress?
(Score: 2) by mojo chan on Wednesday April 15 2015, @07:25AM
The point of mandatory vaccinations is to protect the child and other children around them. Refusing to provide that child with schooling only harms the child further. I don't know about Australia, but in Europe education is a human right that the parents and state can't deny they child.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday April 15 2015, @08:03AM
Leaving the parents without enough money to buy food is pretty harmful to the child as well.