• If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread
  • The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us.
  • >>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
    Don't forget to include your username

State takes away rights of parents again

casper314

TMF Poster
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
149
Points
0
New Jersey is the first state to make it mandatory for children between the ages of 6 mos. – 6 years old to receive flu shots. If they do not, the child cannot attend any state sponsored day care or pre-school.
Should the parent retain the right to vaccinate their children on their timetable, or should the state enact restriction to force parents to comply to doctors beliefs?


I personally have a problem with flu vaccination; it doesn’t make sense to me to purposely infect someone poison in order to help them build up an tolerance to it. They said the vaccine is harmless, however, they have to re-invent it every year because the virus tends to mutate every year. Furthermore, if the new batch of serum is not mixed correctly or become contaminated you will be more susceptible to becoming more sickly than if you didn’t take the shot.
This is just another way to use poor people as human ginny pigs for the rich drug manufactures.
 
Meh, i knew it was coming eventually. I'm no fan of the flu shot either and i won't get my kid vaccinated until i know at least 5 people who have already gotten the flu shot without side effects. Last year she went without the vaccine, too many people came down way too sick for my liking. Give it a few more years of tweaking, it'll be alright. I personally have never had the flu shot and have no intention of getting one in the near future.
 
Hmmm.....my emotions are mixed on this one.

What about the standard vaccinations infants and toddlers get for measles, mumps, etc? I'm thinking we're close in age so you should remember the measles and mumps when there were no vaccinations for them. I caught them both and it was a miserable experience.

But I'll agree with you on the flu shot; I have to get them every year now because I got pneumonia after five bouts with the flu last year. But there are so many strains of flu it is impossible to vaccinate for all of them. I also don't know just how involved the state should be in the homes of families. It's a slippery slope and it looks like we're going to see a lot of litigation in an already overwhelmed legal system because of stuff like this.
 
Well, it's kind of common sense to get your kids vaccinated.

Doctors don't have an uninformed belief that vaccinations work, it's been proven! Trust them, they know more about it than you (you, as in the general populous) do.
 
Hi

If you have religious beliefs cod you not use that to say i thank not??
 
Doctors don't have an uninformed belief that vaccinations work, it's been proven! Trust them, they know more about it than you (you, as in the general populous) do.

I agree, R2.

There is a reason for vaccinations since children are more susceptible to colds and tend to carry more microbes pertaining to the flu; however, I personally never had a flu-shot and can remember only being sick twice my entire life.
 
Vaccinations are a case where I believe public good should trump parental choice. For the kinds of vaccinations we are talking about, the risks posed by the vaccines themselves are very low, but the risks of the diseases they prevent are typically much higher. For most adults, the flu is a severe, but non life threatening illness. For the elderly and the very young, it can have serious, life thretening complications like pneumonia.

In addition, universal vaccination leads to the phenomenon of "herd immunity". If a high enough percentage of the population gets vaccinated, diseases can't find enough succeptible hosts to continue spreading. On the other hand, in places in the US where parents can freely exempt their children from immunization, we are now seeing serious outbreaks of childhood illnesses like measles that were previously all but eradicated here.

On First Amendment, seperation of church and state grounds, I must grudgingly accept religious exemptions to vaccintations. But other, non-medical exemptions should not be permitted.
 
As far as I know, the flu vaccine is not live, therefore you cannot catch flu from the vaccine. There are side effects, but the risks of having any are minimal. The flu jab is mainly administered to those considered 'vulnerable' - those of a certain age, or those with particularly debilitating illnesses that make sufferers susceptible to the virus. To those people, there is potential for the virus to be fatal. Better to suffer the side effects than to die from it and possibly even pass it on and kill someone else. But then in hindsight and with freedom of choice, they should have got the vaccine too. I don't think that there's a right or wrong answer to this debate, only opinions and choices, and the legislation should provide for both. If you want it, you should be able to have it, and if you don't, you shouldn't have to.
 
Last edited:
I agree that the argument of herd immunity trumps the right of the parent.

A parent might prefer to take the risk that their child become sick rather than the (relatively minimal) risk that they will have an adverse reaction to the vaccination but, if the child does become sick, they will pose a risk to other people.

In this case, the state isn't forcing people to vaccinate their children. They are merely taking a reasonable step to protect the majority of children from the one parent who decides not to take up the vaccination.
 
it doesn’t make sense to me to purposely infect someone poison in order to help them build up an tolerance to it.

Well that's pretty much how all vaccinations work.

They said the vaccine is harmless, however, they have to re-invent it every year because the virus tends to mutate every year.

How does that make it harmful?

I can't agree with your view here, I think it's a completely fair rule. What about the rights of parents not to have their kids exposed to the flu? In a place like a school, where the same people are all crammed into the same building every day, things like the flu spread like wildfire. It makes complete sense to me, I don't really buy the risks you mention.
 
I'm on the same boat of for children it can be more serious, and they are crammed into a building, close quarters with 20-30 others. They are susceptible. You have to weigh the option of side effect versus the actual virus. If you can catch free flu shots for your family through work or even $5-10 flu shots at a clinic, I think it's worth it. A bad bout of flu in a young child can land them in the hospital, and we all know how ridiculous that price tag gets. Again that is only my opinion and I won't tell a parent what to choose for their own child.

it doesn’t make sense to me to purposely infect someone poison in order to help them build up an tolerance to it.
As for that, I agree it does "sound" messed up, but it is pretty much how vaccines work. A little more clinical description is:

The immune system recognizes vaccine agents as foreign, destroys them, and 'remembers' them. When the virulent version of an agent comes along the body recognises the protein coat on the virus, and thus is prepared to respond, by (1) neutralizing the target agent before it can enter cells, and (2) by recognizing and destroying infected cells before that agent can multiply to vast numbers.

Vaccines have contributed to the eradication of smallpox, one of the most contagious and deadly diseases known to man. Other diseases such as rubella, polio, measles, mumps, chickenpox, and typhoid are nowhere near as common as they were a hundred years ago. As long as the vast majority of people are vaccinated, it is much more difficult for an outbreak of disease to occur, let alone spread. This effect is called herd immunity. Polio, which is transmitted only between humans, is targeted by an extensive eradication campaign that has seen endemic polio restricted to only parts of four countries.[1] The difficulty of reaching all children as well as cultural misunderstandings, however, have caused the anticipated eradication date to be missed several times.


Side story:
I used to be super allergic to poison ivy when I was a kid. That sucks as a kid in the south, where all outdoor areas including the city park were tree lined and passing within feet of it would infect me. In 6th grade, I caught a bout so bad that it put me in the hospital for a week, by basically having my face and neck swell so bad, the doctor thought it might squeeze my larynx shut. Anyway, when I came out of the hospital, he let me me and my parents know there were clinical trials going in for a vaccine that showed tremendous progress in building immunity to the poison. At the time of him explaining it I remember thinking "there is poison ivy in that needle???" and he explained it was a dead or "inactive" version of the poison and gave the description from above.

My parents and I agreed, and on every Tuesday morning for 6-12 months we stopped in the doctor's office, I got a shot in the ass then went to school, and it was all paid for by the trials. We were told they were hoping I'd be affected by poison ivy about 70% less than before. Well it turned out better than that. For all intensive purposes, I'm almost immune to poison ivy today. When burning all the trees in a pasture on farm property my family owns, my brother and myself handled logs with poison ivy on them and burned them, with the poison in the smoke (unknowingly), and he got it bad, and I got nothing. In fact, I've never gotten poison ivy again since those shots in 1988.
 
I don't think it's a bad idea....

Me personally I will not do clinical trials ever again. I did them when I was younger to test the drug Claritin (you know the one for allergies that almost everyone is okay with,) and I wound up being highly allergic to it. Irony.

As a teacher though, having the kids vaccinated when they come to school is a total benefit.
 
I agree totally with making the flu shots mandatory. The reasoning behind it is sound and I think overall the benefit is vast.
I used to do first aid/ambulance and I can remember after having my vaccine for Hepatitis I was sick for two weeks, but always felt it was much better than the potential alternative.
 
There are many religious beliefs that say that children should not get shots. This is common among the Amish populations here in Pennsylvania. There are people who believe that only prayer can cure illness. These people are sometimes forced by a court of law to allow the doctors to perform the necessary medications and surgery needed to keep a person alive. I have received flu shots without any side effects. We have the miracles of modern medicine to keep us all safe from unnecessary illness.
 
I think that if an adult makes a decision to refuse medical treatment for religious reasons that is their personal choice. I might not agree with it and, frankly, I think its backwards and irrational but it is their choice.

If the religious choice of the parents is imposed upon the children then the courts are quite correct to intervene to ensure the child gets the best possible treatment until they are able to make the decision themselves.

It becomes even more of an issue where the decision does not only affect the individual making the choice, such as refusing a blood transfusion, but where the decision affects others (such as refusing a vaccination and becoming a vector for disease and infecting other non-consenting people).
 
Well that's pretty much how all vaccinations work.



How does that make it harmful?

I can't agree with your view here, I think it's a completely fair rule. What about the rights of parents not to have their kids exposed to the flu? In a place like a school, where the same people are all crammed into the same building every day, things like the flu spread like wildfire. It makes complete sense to me, I don't really buy the risks you mention.


going buy what you said:
why not make it mandatory for adults to take flu shots? why not make it mandatory for adults not to eat fried food; for adults to only drink water and milk. you must go to church every day because we as a institution of pastors fear for your soul.

why don't the government make it mandatory for everyone to wear helmets, knees and elbow protectors when walking? Can't you feel and had hurt yourself? why not make it mandatory to remove all swimming pools and bath tubes? kids drowns in them and so do adults?

Life pose an inherent risk that you might die; even if you do everything right. you still might die at an early age.

when institutions like doctors, pastors, and teachers start using the government to mandate how people should live and raise their family when will it ends?
 
going buy what you said:
why not make it mandatory for adults to take flu shots? why not make it mandatory for adults not to eat fried food; for adults to only drink water and milk. you must go to church every day because we as a institution of pastors fear for your soul.

why don't the government make it mandatory for everyone to wear helmets, knees and elbow protectors when walking? Can't you feel and had hurt yourself? why not make it mandatory to remove all swimming pools and bath tubes? kids drowns in them and so do adults?

Life pose an inherent risk that you might die; even if you do everything right. you still might die at an early age.

when institutions like doctors, pastors, and teachers start using the government to mandate how people should live and raise their family when will it ends?

There is an important difference between all of the examples you cite and vaccination. If eat unhealthy foods, bike without a helmet, or swim in a pool, the risk you are exposed to is personal. You don't really risk directly harming anyone but yourself. But if you choose to not get your child vaccinated, you increase the risk of serious disease not only for your own child, but also for everyone your child is exposed to, even people who did get vaccinated.

It's one thing to put only yourself at extra risk. It's quite another to expose everyone else to extra risk involuntarily. It is entirely appropriate for the government to act in this case to keep people from harming others by their actions.
 
It's one thing to put only yourself at extra risk. It's quite another to expose everyone else to extra risk involuntarily. It is entirely appropriate for the government to act in this case to keep people from harming others by their actions.

I'm curious about something; please bear with me.

How many of you who side with the state's decision HAVE children under the age of 18? You see, although I don't have reservations about vaccinating my children (all their shots are up to date), I have huge reservations about the state telling me how to parent my children.

I'm okay with the state's decision on this matter because it doesn't directly affect me. But what happens if the state makes a decision that lands directly on my doorstep, or yours at that matter? Would you be so quick to say they were right then? Would you want the state making a decision that has such an impact on your household?

I'm playing devils' advocate here, but there is some legitimcay to these questions.
 
I do not vaccinate my son for the flu for several reasons.

The flu vaccine difers from year to year and is only effective for some strains not all, and there is no guarantee that the vaccination will stop one from getting the flu anyway.

The vaccine mut be given every year, not a one or to timer like in vaccines for more serious diseases.

I myself never get vaccinated and will not subject my child to a shot every year that may do nothing. If they were to create a vacine that was guaranteed to work on all strains and keep him from getting the flu then it would be my parental duty to see he got it. Since they cannot, then I look at it as an unecceary risk of possibly making my son sick by getting the shot and I will not do that.

No government agency has the right to tell me to put my child at risk without subjecting said agency to a lawsuit if the vaccine does more harm than good.
 
I do not vaccinate my son for the flu for several reasons.

The flu vaccine difers from year to year and is only effective for some strains not all, and there is no guarantee that the vaccination will stop one from getting the flu anyway.

The vaccine mut be given every year, not a one or to timer like in vaccines for more serious diseases.

I myself never get vaccinated and will not subject my child to a shot every year that may do nothing. If they were to create a vacine that was guaranteed to work on all strains and keep him from getting the flu then it would be my parental duty to see he got it. Since they cannot, then I look at it as an unecceary risk of possibly making my son sick by getting the shot and I will not do that.

No government agency has the right to tell me to put my child at risk without subjecting said agency to a lawsuit if the vaccine does more harm than good.

THANK YOU!! hehehe so i'm not crazy afterall...
 
How many of you who side with the state's decision HAVE children under the age of 18? You see, although I don't have reservations about vaccinating my children (all their shots are up to date), I have huge reservations about the state telling me how to parent my children.

Although I don't yet have any children, I believe that having children isn't necessarily a prerequisite to expressing an opinion on matters related to parenting. I am also confident that my opinion on mandatory vaccinations will not change once I do have children.

I believe that parents do not and should not have absolute rights over their children. I believe that the state can and does legitimately impose certain restrictions on parents, such as requiring that children be educated, and requiring that children receive certain vaccinations. In the case of vaccinations, I believe public health trumps parental rights.
 
Although I don't yet have any children, I believe that having children isn't necessarily a prerequisite to expressing an opinion on matters related to parenting. I am also confident that my opinion on mandatory vaccinations will not change once I do have children.

I believe that parents do not and should not have absolute rights over their children. I believe that the state can and does legitimately impose certain restrictions on parents, such as requiring that children be educated, and requiring that children receive certain vaccinations. In the case of vaccinations, I believe public health trumps parental rights.

and should you have children I guarantee your opinion will change..

As for the vaccination in question, it is not proven that it will protect the child given t or those around him from contractong or carrying the flu and is therefor useless..
 
Although I don't yet have any children, I believe that having children isn't necessarily a prerequisite to expressing an opinion on matters related to parenting. I am also confident that my opinion on mandatory vaccinations will not change once I do have children.

I believe that parents do not and should not have absolute rights over their children. I believe that the state can and does legitimately impose certain restrictions on parents, such as requiring that children be educated, and requiring that children receive certain vaccinations. In the case of vaccinations, I believe public health trumps parental rights.

I first want to clarify that just because someone isn't a parent doesn't mean their opinions should be negated. I know parents who do that but it's really ignorant IMO.

Second, your opinions about a lot of things will change once you do have children, trust me. When children come into the picture, everything changes. If someone has a child and their life hasn't changed, something's wrong.

Vaccinations are one thing, but the flu shot is another. Why make kids get the shot every year and it's not even guaranteed to work? As I stated in an earlier post, we no longer see cases of measles, mumps, etc because the vaccinations work. We don't vaccinate children for those diseases every year either.

If the state wants to mandate this they need to work on a flu shot that covers all strains and only has to be administered once. I won't hold my breath on that one.
 
What's New
7/21/25
Visit Door 44 for a large selection of tickling clips!
Door 44
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1704 ***
The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Back
Top