The Vaccination Debate

Frontline Video (click to view starting at 42:00)

• fact check - is Hepatitis B a sexually transmitted disease?

How easy is it to opt out?

• Texas exemption law
• California exemption law
• Laws in all 50 states
• Other laws (Texas):  seat belts, child safety seats

Herd immunity

• info at wikipedia

The ethics of opting out

• parents who do vaccinate
• parents who haven't vaccinated because child has health problem or is too young
• parents who refuse to vaccinate for religious reasons (example:  Christian Science)
• parents who refuse to vaccinate based on personal belief

Janet Stemwedel -- The Ethics of Opting out of Vaccinations

Parents must vaccinate for several reasons:

1. We have a duty to take good care of our own children. (vaccination is like using child safety seats and seat belts)
2. We have a duty to inform ourselves, to consult experts, and not to presume expertise that we lack.
3. We should be responsible to other members of society.  We should not be "free riders." 

Stemwedel's free rider account of parents who opt out

 Is this an adequate definition of "free rider"?  Which parents below are free riders?

1. Parent A enjoys the flowers the PTA has planted at the school entrance but doesn't participate in the PTA.
2. Parent B stays at the talent show until her child performs, then leaves.
3. Parent C wants her child to have a healthy snack at preschool but never contributes snacks, like other parents do.

A free rider ... (what should we add to condition #1?)

1. Accepts a benefit without paying for it. AND
2. Wants that benefit, cares about continuing to enjoy it. AND
3. Could have paid without causing undue harm to anyone.  AND... (are there more conditions?)

The three cases:

1. Parent A meets condition #1.  The benefit is seeing the flowers, the payment is helping with the planting.  She may not meet conditions #2.  If she does meet condition #2, she may not meet condition #3.  Perhaps the flower-planters would rather do the work themselves.
2. Parent B meets condition #1--the benefit is having an audience watch and applaud his child.  The payment is staying to watch other people's children. Parent B probably also meets condition #2--most parents want an audience for their child.  Parent B probably also meets condition #3--he could stay without causing undue harm to anyone. (This wouldn't be so if he had to be home early to take care of another child.)
3. Parent C probably meets condition #1 and the other two conditions. Benefit is child having a health snack. Payment is bringing snacks when it's her turn. Condition #3 wouldn't be met if parent has very limited means.

Questions

1. By this improved definition, are parents who don't vaccinate for religious or personal reasons free riders?  Benefit:  other children's vaccinations protect my child.  Payment:  vaccinating my child, despite small associated risks.  Do they meet all three conditions?
2. If your child is not vaccinated, should you have to isolate him or her from other children?
3. Are non-vaccinating parents free-riders OR ignorant OR both?
4. Should states allow any but medical exemptions to school vaccination requirements?