• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Government policy on vaccines

Should the government require vaccines?

  • All parents should be allowed to choose whether or not to vaccinate their kids

    Votes: 7 21.9%

  • The government should require vaccines for all children attending public schools

    Votes: 18 56.3%

  • Parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be subject to child neglect laws

    Votes: 5 15.6%

  • The government should require vaccines for everyone

    Votes: 6 18.8%

  • Vaccines should be required, but people with legitimate religious objections should be exempted

    Votes: 5 15.6%

  • Some vaccines should be banned until they are made safe

    Votes: 10 31.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 4 12.5%
  • Total voters
    32
Kandahar

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What do you think government policy should be on immunizations for children/adolescents?
 
Last edited:
With the rise of anti-vaccine lunatics (and they ARE lunatics), there is a resurgence of diseases of third-world diseases here in the United States. This would be bad enough if irresponsible parents were only harming their own kids...but the more people that aren't vaccinated, the more likely it is for a disease to transmit to others.

As Dr. Paul Offit told TIME Magazine, some people can't be vaccinated due to real medical problems, and so they are at the mercy of whatever diseases others are carrying. As he says, "We don't think it's an inalienable right to transmit a potentially fatal infection to a group of vulnerable, hospitalized children." I think the same could apply to schools, public areas, or just about anywhere else.

What do you think the government's attitude toward vaccinations should be? Should there be a laissez-faire approach where everyone is allowed to vaccinate or not vaccinate their own kids? Or should the government require it since it's a threat to the public?
 
I did not get my children vaccines until school. Well they had a few but I believe they were too close together and dont need them all at once. I know this might sound odd but I didnt have that many shots growing up and my immune system is great. My kids also have never been really sick besides an occasional cough or sneeze and I go get them flu shots. However almost all my kids are in school so they do have what is required to attend school. Also I had an awful experience with my oldest daughter when she received shots when she was 6 mths old. My insurance denied us changing doctors so we stopped going.
 
Vaccination for diseases as dangerous as smallpox should be mandatory for everyone with no exceptions. Lesser vaccines should be required for children attending public school and government jobs. All vaccines should be funded by the government and maybe add tax incentives for families who vaccinate their children.
 
I use to feel as if the government was just bullying me around concernign vaccinations. You know - telling me what to do for no real reason.

Until I was doing research for a paper and came across some pretty distrubing images and facts about all those diseases - why we vaccinate against them - and how devastating they can be.

You bet your ass I hurried quick and got all my kids vaccinations up to date after that.

Just last night my husband and I were talking about this and I told him that we just don't *know* how devastating widespread attacks of tuberculosis, rubella, mumps and small pocks can be because it's been a while - it's not in our 'radar' of awareness. Just like real warfare - it's always "over there" and never "over here"
 
Last edited:
I hesitate to have the government force parents to vaccinate their children. However, I stand by the government's right to tell those same parents that if they don't get their children vaccinated, those children cannot attend public schools.

As for the "vaccines should be banned until safe" option, vaccines are not released until they are either deemed safe or, in the instance of some vaccines required by military personnel going to exotic locations, have a very low percentage of side effects versus the potential for harm.

Over the past decade or two, there have been numerous alarmist groups touting the dangers of childhood vaccinations. Many of these groups have been busted, found to be scam organizations defrauding the public. Now we are seeing a huge resurgence of whooping cough, measles, tuberculosis... all the diseases these vaccines once had nearly irradicated. Parents need to be educated, but if they still refuse, then their children need to be isolated from the public school system.
 
Kandahar said:
With the rise of anti-vaccine lunatics (and they ARE lunatics), there is a resurgence of diseases of third-world diseases here in the United States. This would be bad enough if irresponsible parents were only harming their own kids...but the more people that aren't vaccinated, the more likely it is for a disease to transmit to others.

As Dr. Paul Offit told TIME Magazine, some people can't be vaccinated due to real medical problems, and so they are at the mercy of whatever diseases others are carrying. As he says, "We don't think it's an inalienable right to transmit a potentially fatal infection to a group of vulnerable, hospitalized children." I think the same could apply to schools, public areas, or just about anywhere else.

What do you think the government's attitude toward vaccinations should be? Should there be a laissez-faire approach where everyone is allowed to vaccinate or not vaccinate their own kids? Or should the government require it since it's a threat to the public?
Click to expand...

A rare moment of total agreement with a liberal for me here.
 
Kandahar said:
What do you think government policy should be on immunizations for children/adolescents?
Click to expand...

I think it's important enough that the Federal government should legislate that all school-aged children be appropriately vaccinated...home-schooled or not...private schools...all of them.

I also think that the American Academy of Pediatrics in conjunction with the NIH and CDC should make the call about what vaccines are safe and which are appropriate. I'm not really convinced they're all necessary....or that they're all safe.
 
If the vaccine has been tried and proven over the course of decades - like polio - then it should be mandatory. I support giving parents a window of time in order to get it done. There is some research to suggest that vaccinating newborns might have some negative effects. Whether or not it's true, I can understand if parents want to wait until their kid is 3-4 before getting the major vaccines done.

Stuff like the flu shot and chicken pox, I am against mandatory vaccinations for those. They haven't had long term scrutiny yet and they aren't life threatening conditions anyway.
 
All school aged children should be vaccinated, except for ones with legitimate medical reasons.
 
I wonder, does the state own your kids or are you solely responsible for your own kids?
I think in the end it all comes down to choice vs. force.
 
peepnklown said:
I wonder, does the state own your kids or are you solely responsible for your own kids?
I think in the end it all comes down to choice vs. force.
Click to expand...

I would agree with you in most cases but the problem is that vaccines require herd immunity to be effective over large populations. It makes no sense for 50% of the population to be vaccinated while the other 50% is not. At higher vaccination numbers, some individuals can exist without the vaccines and still reap the benefits of everyone else being immune, but the numbers diminish greatly as fewer people get vaccinated. It's how we stamped out things like polio and kept them from ever coming back.

When it comes to the common worldwide diseases like polio, TB, diptheria, tetanus, typhoid, etc. people who are against vaccines show little knowledge of history. The epidemics that ravanged the U.S. even just 100 years ago were horrendous. These vaccines should not be optional and I would even argue that they are required for national security.

Like I said though, the flu shot and chicken pox vaccines should not be mandatory.
 
Temporal said:
If the vaccine has been tried and proven over the course of decades - like polio - then it should be mandatory. I support giving parents a window of time in order to get it done. There is some research to suggest that vaccinating newborns might have some negative effects. Whether or not it's true, I can understand if parents want to wait until their kid is 3-4 before getting the major vaccines done.

Stuff like the flu shot and chicken pox, I am against mandatory vaccinations for those. They haven't had long term scrutiny yet and they aren't life threatening conditions anyway.
Click to expand...

Chicken pox can be life threatening. So can the flu.
 
Temporal said:
So get the vaccine if you think you're at risk. Not everyone needs to have it, especially given that the flu mutates yearly.
Click to expand...

You said they aren't life threatening conditions when they can be and I am more concerned with chicken pox (almost died from it) than the flu.
 
Kali said:
You said they aren't life threatening conditions when they can be and I am more concerned with chicken pox (almost died from it) than the flu.
Click to expand...

But it's only rarely life threatning, and the vaccine only lasts 5 years. It's much more expedient to let people develop a life long immunity, especially as children when it's less severe.
 
Kali said:
You said they aren't life threatening conditions when they can be and I am more concerned with chicken pox (almost died from it) than the flu.
Click to expand...

Most kids get chickenpox when they're young and it's rare for there to be life threatening complications... certainly they aren't common enough to mandate the whole population get the vaccine. Chicken pox is practically a rite of passage.
 
Kandahar said:
What do you think government policy should be on immunizations for children/adolescents?
Click to expand...

If a vacceine is proven safe (and I am not referring to the crazy vacceines caused my kid to be autistic crowd), then they should be required. Simple as that.
 
peepnklown said:
I wonder, does the state own your kids or are you solely responsible for your own kids?
I think in the end it all comes down to choice vs. force.
Click to expand...

And this scenario sometimes shows that having to force people to not be idiots can at times be a good thing.
 
Absolutely all children should be vaccinated, no matter where they attend school, except for those who legitimately medically cannot do so. There should be no exceptions of any kind.
 
Unless you plan to keep your children in a safe for the rest of their lives, they should be vaccinated and it's something the government has an active interest in funding. This nonsense that you should have a choice as to whether or not you can carry a disease which will affect the population is just that, nonsense. I remember reading this article about just how horrible contagious the flu is and it shocked me. Just going to an emergency room can spread your germs into dozens of people who may have come in with a simple sprain or a migraine. It's disgusting just how fast diseases and viruses can spread amongst large groups of people.
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Unless you plan to keep your children in a safe for the rest of their lives, they should be vaccinated and it's something the government has an active interest in funding. This nonsense that you should have a choice as to whether or not you can carry a disease which will affect the population is just that, nonsense. I remember reading this article about just how horrible contagious the flu is and it shocked me. Just going to an emergency room can spread your germs into dozens of people who may have come in with a simple sprain or a migraine. It's disgusting just how fast diseases and viruses can spread amongst large groups of people.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the flu vaccine doesn't prevent that. Every year they pick which flu strains will be statistically more likely to have dominance and include those in the vaccines, but there are other strains at large. It's impossible to vaccinate against them all, and even if you do, within a year they mutate into something different. So even if you have the vaccine and end up in a hospital, you could still get the flu if a different strain has contaminated the air.

The flu vaccine should be optional as it does not create a foolproof herd immunity like the other kinds of vaccines do. I've never gotten the flu vaccine mostly because I never get the flu, but there's something to be said for letting your body get sick now and again. It keeps your immune system active at all levels.
 
But what makes the FLU so deadly isn't even the virus itself (whichever strain you catch) - it's the symptoms - usually dehydration.

That's one way in which H1N1 differed from the traditional flu - H1N1 lead to complications *not* because of dehydration-causes like excessive vomiting - but bacterial infections and related complications for people who have problems.
 
One has to wonder what humanity did all those thousands of years before current medical technology came along......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom