[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

You can make an argument that unvaccinated kids help spreading diseases. As I said, a societal dimension of an individual decision

You'd save more lives by banning all non-essential travel by vehicle so why not do that?

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Any chance for a naked wrestle to settle our little argument?

Dezzy might try to get involved, and unchecked sarcasm completely kills my buzz

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Dezzy might try to get involved, and unchecked sarcasm completely kills my buzz

Dezzy means well. We all are really in broad agreement on this issue.

[Ammi]

...it is a very difficult one though because if people in large numbers chose to ignore medical opinion and didn’t have their children inoculated...?...then deadly infant diseases would grow more and more common in the western world...and that’s also going backwards in time surely..?...to me that would be the by far worse scenario...

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Dezzy might try to get involved, and unchecked sarcasm completely kills my buzz

...and yet you have been a user of it on several occasions TS, you know you have...enough now with the personal silliness...you both just have polar opposite opinions with this is all and both feel equally strongly about it...

[Tom4784]

There's a lot of 'look over here instead of at the issue' going on here.

The current outbreaks in the US are down to the rise of anti-Vaxxers that believe what they find to be convenient over scientific fact. They disregard reality in favour of conspiracy.

Vaccines can have side effects but it's down to vaccines that many terrible diseases have been eradicated and it's because of moronic parents that care more about their facebook groups than their children that these illnesses could return. If you are willing to put your child in harm's way for your beliefs then that is child endangerment to me and should be treated as such.

Even entertaining their ignorance for a second validates it in their eyes so I can't see TS' view as anything other than encouragement of the anti-vaxxer movement even if he says he disagrees with it.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...it is a very difficult one though because if people in large numbers chose to ignore medical opinion and didn’t have their children inoculated...?...then deadly infant diseases would grow more and more common in the western world...and that’s also going backwards in time surely..?...to me that would be the by far worse scenario...

We fundamentally disagree on where that ends though Ammi. In an ideal world we can "pick and choose" our freedoms but that's never how it's going to work. Either you fight to protect autonomy and the basic right of people to make their own decisions, or you accept that all of these decisions are ultimately in the hands of a higher authority.

I will never agree that the latter is the better option, and I think a "half way" choice with "exceptions" is naive. If you accept giving the authorities the right to make one medical decision for yourself and your family, you accept the path where the authorities make all medical decisions for all families.

Vaccinating is the right choice but no one is ever going to convince me that the choice should be taken away.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

There's a lot of 'look over here instead of at the issue' going on here.

The current outbreaks in the US are down to the rise of anti-Vaxxers that believe what they find to be convenient over scientific fact. They disregard reality in favour of conspiracy.

Vaccines can have side effects but it's down to vaccines that many terrible diseases have been eradicated and it's because of moronic parents that care more about their facebook groups than their children that these illnesses could return. If you are willing to put your child in harm's way for your beliefs then that is child endangerment to me and should be treated as such.

Even entertaining their ignorance for a second validates it in their eyes so I can't see TS' view as anything other than encouragement of the anti-vaxxer movement even if he says he disagrees with it.

I can only refer you to what I said above. Giving up the freedom of choice in terms of medical treatment goes way beyond vaccination in terms of precedent, and I think believing "it would definitely just be vaccination" is naive. Its advocating an end game of increasing state control over medical decisions and the removal of literally THE most basic right: bodily autonomy.

So I can only stand by what I said. Legal intervention is wrong and conceptually terrifying, and scare tactics that involve flat out lies ("your children will die if you don't vaccinate!!") are ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. Because it literally takes 5 seconds of googling to reveal that that is false, and thus, the whole argument collapses and becomes irrelevant. WHY would you expect people to listen to people after they have engaged in arguments that are scientifically verifiable lies? It's madness.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

We fundamentally disagree on where that ends though Ammi. In an ideal world we can "pick and choose" our freedoms but that's never how it's going to work. Either you fight to protect autonomy and the basic right of people to make their own decisions, or you accept that all of these decisions are ultimately in the hands of a higher authority.

I will never agree that the latter is the better option, and I think a "half way" choice with "exceptions" is naive. If you accept giving the authorities the right to make one medical decision for yourself and your family, you accept the path where the authorities make all medical decisions for all families.

Vaccinating is the right choice but no one is ever going to convince me that the choice should be taken away.

...but then this ‘choice’ is not made about us as adults, TS...what if every parent or a majority of parents said...no!!...we won’t inoculate, it’s our child and our choice...the Western world regresses into many child deaths and we as parents felt it was our right to decide on the potential life or death of our child..?...I really do think it’s a complicated thing to consider tbh...

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...but then this ‘choice’ is not made about us as adults, TS...what if every parent or a majority of parents said...no!!...we won’t inoculate, it’s our child and our choice...the Western world regresses into many child deaths and we as parents felt it was our right to decide on the potential life or death of our child..?...I really do think it’s a complicated thing to consider tbh...

It is complicated but it's not something I haven't given significant thought or that I say flippantly. We have to protect our right to freedom and autonomy tooth and nail, the world's systems of authority - and certainly those in the US, and here in the UK - have done absolutely NOTHING that suggests we should give them such implicit trust that we hand over such fundamental decisions to them. Maybe in another, much better, world it would be safe to do that but not in this one.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It is complicated but it's not something I haven't given significant thought or that I say flippantly. We have to protect our right to freedom and autonomy tooth and nail, the world's systems of authority - and certainly those in the US, and here in the UK - have done absolutely NOTHING that suggests we should give them such implicit trust that we hand over such fundamental decisions to them. Maybe in another, much better, world it would be safe to do that but not in this one.

...of course, we do have to try to protect our freedoms and our children’s freedoms...but do we ever have the right to deny them of something when in doing so could significantly increase their risks to diseases which at worst could end their life as well as possibly leaving lifetime disabilities...if a parent chose to deliberately go against medical advice with something so serious as someone else’s life....?...then should the decision really remain with them..?...this surely is when in the past, courts have intervened...

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...of course, we do have to try to protect our freedoms and our children’s freedoms...but do we ever have the right to deny them of something when in doing so could significantly increase their risks to diseases which at worst could end their life as well as possibly leaving lifetime disabilities...if a parent chose to deliberately go against medical advice with something so serious as someone else’s life....?...then should the decision really remain with them..?...this surely is when in the past, courts have intervened...

But that's over-emphasising the risks associated with childhood illness and relying on scare tactics in order to push through something mandatory when it should remain strictly voluntary. Again, this hinges on the (IMO naive) idea that it's a self-contained concession of autonomy.

The current vaccine schedule is reasonable and effective and everyone SHOULD adhere to it voluntarily. What if we give away our right to choose, and then in a year's time some government department decides to add in 10 new vaccines for relatively low risk illnesses, and some of the research puts a question mark over how safe or effective the new ones are? What if we THEN decide "Oh I'm not sure about all of these?". Well, tough **** you gave away the right to make that assessment, and your kids will be forcibly taken from you if you fail to comply.

Its horrifying!

I don't know how anyone can believe otherwise, unless they truly believe that giving away that right would be limited to the current vaccine schedule. Or even just vaccines. That's not how it works, and that's not how guardianship works. You sign away the right to make that decision and you sign away all of your medical decisions. You sign away your right to make that decision for your children and you sign away parental guardianship in favour of state guardianship. It's not a pick'n'mix.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

But that's over-emphasising the risks associated with childhood illness and relying on scare tactics in order to push through something mandatory when it should remain strictly voluntary. Again, this hinges on the (IMO naive) idea that it's a self-contained concession of autonomy.

The current vaccine schedule is reasonable and effective and everyone SHOULD adhere to it voluntarily. What if we give away our right to choose, and then in a year's time some government department decides to add in 10 new vaccines for relatively low risk illnesses, and some of the research puts a question mark over how safe or effective the new ones are? What if we THEN decide "Oh I'm not sure about all of these?". Well, tough **** you gave away the right to make that assessment, and your kids will be forcibly taken from you if you fail to comply.

Its horrifying!

I don't know how anyone can believe otherwise, unless they truly believe that giving away that right would be limited to the current vaccine schedule. Or even just vaccines. That's not how it works, and that's not how guardianship works. You sign away the right to make that decision and you sign away all of your medical decisions. You sign away your right to make that decision for your children and you sign away parental guardianship in favour of state guardianship. It's not a pick'n'mix.

...with measles isn’t it something like a one in twenty ration of complications occurring in children under 5 yrs old..?...that isn’t a scare tactic TS, that’s a terrifying percentage to take a risk of a child contracting the disease through not being given an inoculation...of course, a complication won’t necessarily be life threatening, I understand that...but some of the complications like pneumonia are obviously life threatening ...and also these complications can lead to life long disabilities...I mean most parents do opt for the vaccination because the risks of not having it far outweigh the risks of having it and some there being a life endangering reaction...

...guardianship of our children surely works to safeguard them, to make decisions for them...(..until they of an age to make their own life decisions..)...which we feel will keep them safe, which will preserve and protect their lives as best we can...refusing a vaccination which counters those things...(...without very specific medical reasons, not just worries etc..).. is surely putting a child at risk...

[Ammi]

...and that’s horrifying to me...we don’t ‘own’ our children, we guard them ...we preserve and we protect them ...if all parents said NO because my choice etc then we’re participating in spreading disease which could fill hospitals/medical centres to capacities that could never be sustained...

[Toy Soldier]

All or even most parents will never say no to the main vaccines though, it's not realistic, and you can either believe in the concept of a legal guardian or not I suppose. If you do, then you trust that the legal guardian is genuinely acting in what they sincerely believe is the best interests of their ward. That's what legal guardianship is. It's not a perfect system, but it's the best and least authoritarian system we have.

If you believe that the authorities should have the right to overrule then you don't believe in parental guardianship, you believe in universal state guardianship... And that requires a level of trust in the intentions and competence of the state that I will never agree is justified. We'll have to agree to disagree.

[Ammi]

...yeah we’ll agree to disagree..(...although I did think I agreed until I thought about it more and how complicated it is )...because this seems to be the point where I came in...societal pressure../..social and media influences etc..it’s quite possible that many/far too many parents would say No and with no specific reasons other than fears or concerns ...yes I do believe that the majority of parents always try to act in the interest of their children but I also know that ‘the best interest’ will not be the same for every parent..and sometimes will go against best medical advice...

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...yeah we’ll agree to disagree..(...although I did think I agreed until I thought about it more and how complicated it is )...because this seems to be the point where I came in...societal pressure../..social and media influences etc..it’s quite possible that many/far too many parents would say No and with no specific reasons other than fears or concerns ...yes I do believe that the majority of parents always try to act in the interest of their children but I also know that ‘the best interest’ will not be the same for every parent..and sometimes will go against best medical advice...

I think Facebook / Social Media is a sociological disaster in general and "junk science" is absolutely also a huge problem, but really that's a totally separate issue, and the answer to the problems created by those things is not (in my opinion) to just "grab more control and force people to do the right thing anyway".

[bitontheslide]

education is the obvious solution. Teach people to have critical thinking

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

education is the obvious solution. Teach people to have critical thinking

I do think a big part of the problem is poor perception of risk. E.g. The major death risk of a vaccine reaction is anaphylaxis but your kid is literally at much greater risk of that very thing the first time they encounter a peanut or get stung by a wasp than the first time they get a vaccine but people don't give it a second thought.

They're also at greater risk every time we strap 'em into a car but again, parents who are terrified of vaccines do that every day with a smile.

But again IMO we don't help this poor risk perception with "scary myths" designed to force people to vaccinate, it just furthers the perception of the human body as unpredictable and fragile, and that actually is part of what puts people off vaccines in the first place, ironically.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think Facebook / Social Media is a sociological disaster in general and "junk science" is absolutely also a huge problem, but really that's a totally separate issue, and the answer to the problems created by those things is not (in my opinion) to just "grab more control and force people to do the right thing anyway".

Agreed 100%.

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I do think a big part of the problem is poor perception of risk. E.g. The major death risk of a vaccine reaction is anaphylaxis but your kid is literally at much greater risk of that very thing the first time they encounter a peanut or get stung by a wasp than the first time they get a vaccine but people don't give it a second thought.

They're also at greater risk every time we strap 'em into a car but again, parents who are terrified of vaccines do that every day with a smile.

But again IMO we don't help this poor risk perception with "scary myths" designed to force people to vaccinate, it just furthers the perception of the human body as unpredictable and fragile, and that actually is part of what puts people off vaccines in the first place, ironically.

Also agreed (even though I know one of these one in a milion kids..which DID make me a bit more hesistant). As I said, that reaction can come from anything, however, it really doesn't help matters that medical professionals apparently do not tell parents of the miniscule risk of it, and actively argue with parents who know this risk and tell them that no, it never happens!

I used to argue with anti-vaxxers all the time and honestly, its like arguing with a religious zealot. They utterly refuse to listen to any reason, think you are actively trying to hurt their kids..and honestly it reminds me a bit of a cult at times. I don't waste my time anymore, but quite how..stuck in it they are is quite scary. As I said, Wakefield has a ****ing hell of a lot to answer for and really should be in prison..though what charge, I don't really know! Being struck off really isn't enouh for someone like him, a gastroenterologist who is suddenly an expert on vaccines and spreads dangerous myths that will remain forever...