Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

California Might Eliminate Exemptions to Vaccination Requirements

posted by janrinok on Thursday February 05 2015, @12:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the think-of-the-children dept.

"M. Baranczak" writes:

California, like all the other states, requires children to be vaccinated before attending school. But the law allows exemptions for reasons of religion or "personal beliefs". The recent measles outbreak is causing some politicians to reconsider this approach. The San Jose Mercury News reports:

Two state senators said Wednesday they will introduce legislation to eliminate a controversial "personal belief exemption" that allows California parents to refuse to vaccinate their children.

"We shouldn't wait for more children to sicken or die before we act," Sen. Richard Pan, a Sacramento Democrat who is also a pediatrician, said at a Wednesday news conference. "Parents are letting us know our current laws are insufficient to protect their kids."

Pan is sponsoring the legislation with Sen. Ben Allen, D-Redondo Beach.

In Washington, D.C., California's two Democratic senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, on Wednesday asked state health officials to go further and consider eliminating the "religious exemption."

Further information:
http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-pol-measles-vaccination-20150205-story.html
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/04/health/california-measles-outbreak/

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
California Might Eliminate Exemptions to Vaccination Requirements | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 77 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by hoochiecoochieman on Thursday February 05 2015, @05:20PM

    by hoochiecoochieman (4158) on Thursday February 05 2015, @05:20PM (#141568)

    But here's the kicker: vaccines *aren't* completely safe - a tiny percentage of people ill have potentially crippling or even fatal reactions to them. Much better than the alternative of having these diseases ripping through the population on a regular basis, but there is a very real risk involved. And that means the anti-vaxers are claiming the benefit of herd immunity without making their children take the same risks as everyone else.

    The risk of catching crippling or even fatal diseases is a lot higher than the risk of vaccines. So, I fail to see what risks you're talking about...

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   3  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 05 2015, @05:29PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 05 2015, @05:29PM (#141570)

    The risk of catching crippling or even fatal diseases is a lot higher than the risk of vaccines

    He's saying a risk associated with the vaccine exists. However, anti-vaxers are (or have been) able to get the benefit of herd immunity. So, their kids both don't get measles and don't risk side effects. That is cowardly and selfish.

    Obviously, this is one of the situations where 1 person can win on both scores, but 50% of the people just screw everything up. But that doesn't change that that 1 person is an asshole, even if no one else is affected.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by hoochiecoochieman on Thursday February 05 2015, @07:01PM

      by hoochiecoochieman (4158) on Thursday February 05 2015, @07:01PM (#141606)

      You're seeing it backwards.

      Even if the number of anti-vaxxers was not enough to disrupt herd immunity, the risk of not vaccinating would be higher than that of side-effects. So, it's not so much cowardly and selfish, it's mostly just plain stupid.

      • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday February 05 2015, @08:52PM

        by HiThere (866) on Thursday February 05 2015, @08:52PM (#141644) Journal

        It's also cowardly and selfish because they aren't figuring the odds the same way you are.

        Personally, I don't think children without vaccination should be allowed to attend public school. Let them solve the problem however they want to. I *do* consider it child abuse, but I also consider the costs of having the state mandate some particular solution to be higher than leaving it up to the parents. (In costs I'm more concerned with increasing government power than monetary costs, though those, of course, would also be present.)

        --
        Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.