3 ms·

In the USA, we have the idea of "informed consent" with regards to medical treatments. The ideal standard is that the doctor tells you what you have, and what w

In the USA, we have the idea of "informed consent" with regards to medical treatments. The ideal standard is that the doctor tells you what you have, and what ways there are to treat/manage it. Doing nothing is also an answer. Vaccines are no different: some vaccines have some rather nasty side effects. Except in this country, under 42 U.S. Code § 300aa–22, "No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings." Obviously vaccines don't cause autism. But there are cases in which they do have risk past simple dermatitis reactions. So why are those who are saying "No" being lumped in with "vaccines cause $___" unscientific know-nothings?

ghaff 8y ago
Because ultimately it doesn't matter if they don't want their child to get vaccinated because they've determined the personal risk isn't worth the societal reward or because they think vaccines will steal their kid's soul. The result is the same. Doing nothing is an option even in a state like California. (As it should probably be.) The child just can't attend school (absent a medical exemption).
michaelt 8y ago
Child neglect laws mean parents consenting on behalf of their child are held to a higher standard than adults consenting on behalf of themselves. See Morrison v. State, 252 S.W.2d 97 for example.
tomjen3 8y ago
That law nearly convinced me vaccines were dangerous (after all, why do you otherwise need the law), but the issue is that juries were far too eager to award damages for useless cases, so it would have been unprofitable to make vaccines.

ghaff 8y ago

Because ultimately it doesn't matter if they don't want their child to get vaccinated because they've determined the personal risk isn't worth the societal reward or because they think vaccines will steal their kid's soul. The result is the same. Doing nothing is an option even in a state like California. (As it should probably be.) The child just can't attend school (absent a medical exemption).

michaelt 8y ago

Child neglect laws mean parents consenting on behalf of their child are held to a higher standard than adults consenting on behalf of themselves. See Morrison v. State, 252 S.W.2d 97 for example.

tomjen3 8y ago

That law nearly convinced me vaccines were dangerous (after all, why do you otherwise need the law), but the issue is that juries were far too eager to award damages for useless cases, so it would have been unprofitable to make vaccines.