Should Parents Be Required to Provide Immunizations for Infants - Essay Example

? The Case against Making Infant Immunization mandatory By Law Julie Storey West Georgia Technical College Immunization of infants has been at the crux of public policy of most advanced governments. However, it is often confused with vaccination and the two are used interchangeably. The primary difference between vaccination and immunization is that the former results in the latter only if it is fully effective. As the threat of diseases has decreased over the years, parents have become more relaxed in terms of the safety issues surrounding vaccines. Furthermore, there are strong reasons to consider why infant immunization must not be made legally mandatory. Parents should not be legally required to provide immunization for their infants. Various psychological factors and theories can be attributed to this statement. The ambiguity aversion theory suggests how the failure to measure the risks associated with one’s actions results in the decision not to act. Missing or unavailable information regarding the decision can cause individuals not to act (Serpell & Green, 2006). In a study conducted on flu vaccines, it was discovered that individuals who already display reluctance towards immunization tend not to vaccinate upon receiving additional information. In this case, researchers have discovered that estimates of potential vaccinators or parents willing to provide immunization to their children fell when they became aware of the death rate attributed to vaccination (Meszaros, et al., 1996). For instance, the lack of consensus regarding the notorious MMR vaccine amongst the medical community led parents not to vaccinate their children with MMR because of the criticism surrounding its merits (Serpell & Green, 2006). Furthermore, humans operate on the basis on certain protected values whereby they are bound by certain absolute values that cannot be interfered with (Sturm, Mays, & Zimet, 2005). Certainly, immunization for infants cannot be made legally mandatory for parents because of these values. There are risks associated with the disastrous effects of vaccines on infants as well as mortality which some parents may not be willing to take. This is supported by a study whereby participants chose the vaccine which was least damaging even though it was least effective (Ritov & Baron, 1990). Furthermore, older participants demonstrate greater instances of such behavior (Ritov & Baron, Protected Values and Omission Bias, 1999). Therefore, parents falling in the older age bracket may be less willing to go for harsh vaccines for their infants compared to younger ones. Some vaccines may not provide any real benefit at all or provide benefits that are short-lived. For instance, chickenpox is viewed as a common infection in children even though it is less harmful. Unfortunately, the results of the Varicella vaccine that claims to provide immunity against chickenpox tends to last for only 10 years whereas, getting the infection once is said to provide immunity for one’s entire life (Gust, Darling, Kennedy, & Schwartz, 2008). Clearly in this case, vaccination is doing more harm than good as it stops the occurrence of chickenpox which makes the infant susceptible to getting it at some other point in his/her life (Gust, Darling, Kennedy, & Schwartz, 2008). It is common for parents to weigh the risks against benefits of vaccination. Those who decide not to go ahead with the vaccine have clearly made a choice to risk infection than coping with any unknown side-effects of the vaccine. The fact that Chickenpox is a common disease and that the vaccination causes disruption in the normal course of action in the human body contribute to parents’ decision of not vaccinating their infants against it. However, it is not just the vaccine itself but the process or systems for immunization that can result in parents’ decision of not vaccinating their infants. Of particular importance is the complicated schedules for immunization and long waiting hours in hospitals because of which parents resist the process of vaccination (SANFORD, et al., 2007). These so-called logistics barriers arise when parents find it difficult to transport themselves and their infants to the vaccination facility because of lack of transport or inconvenient vaccination schedules (SANFORD, et al., 2007). Most importantly, unhygienic vaccinations or hospitals result in parents’ decision of not immunizing their infants. Furthermore, the threat of contraindications and lack of prior knowledge regarding the vaccination process results in greater chances of parents not immunizing their infants (SANFORD, et al., 2007). Also related to this factor is the fact that parents’ decision to vaccinate depends to a great extent on the physician’s advice (SANFORD, et al., 2007). Therefore, making immunization of infants mandatory for parents is not a wise strategy as, depending on the health of the infant and family history or other factors, the physician may not advise parents’ to go ahead with their infants’ vaccination. In this case, forcing the parents to get their infants immunized by law would be a harsh step. Another argument that goes against the practice of making infant immunization mandatory is that, contrary to its intended purpose, vaccination often reduces the individual’s immunity, thereby making individuals less able to fend off the infection by themselves if the individuals are healthy (Martin, 1994). Substances required for preservation of the vaccine or parts of the virus that are contained in the vaccine may infect the individual with disease as opposed to its intended purpose of defending the infection (Martin, 1994). Because the immune system of infants is sensitive and vulnerable, this poses increased threat to them. To conclude, parents may not opt for vaccination for their infants for various reasons including the threat it poses to their immune systems and hygiene while at the same time having results that are short-lived. The physician’s advice as well as the harmful side-effects of vaccinations poses as threats to the infant’s sensitive immune systems. Parents, therefore, fully reserve the right to choose whether or not to immunize their children. They may decide to provide full immunization to their infants, choose to immunize them against certain diseases while excluding the rest or opt for not providing any immunization at all. Postponing vaccination until a later stage is also an option. Therefore, making vaccination for infants mandatory by law is not a prudent option. References Gust, Darling, Kennedy, & Schwartz. (2008). Parents with doubts about vaccines: which vaccines and reasons why. Pediatrics, 718-25. Martin, E. (1994). Flexible Bodies: Tracking Immunity in American Culture - From the Days of Polio to the AIDS Epidemic. Boston: Beacon Press. Meszaros, J., Asch, D., Baron, J., Hershey, J., Kunreuther, H., & Schwartz-Buzaglo, J. (1996). Cognitive processes and the decisions of some parents to forego pertussis vaccination for their children. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 697-703. Ritov, I., & Baron, J. (1990). Reluctance to vaccinate: omission bias and ambiguity. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 263-77. Ritov, I., & Baron, J. (1999). Protected Values and Omission Bias. Organizational behavior and human decision processes , 79-94. SANFORD, R., KIMMEL, M., BURNS, M. D., ROBERT, M., WOLFE, M., & RICHARD, K. Z. (2007). Addressing immunization: barriers, benefits, and risks. he Journal of family practice, S61. Serpell, L., & Green, J. (2006). Parental decision-making in childhood vaccination. Vaccine , 4041-6. Sturm, L. A., Mays, R. M., & Zimet, Z. D. (2005). Parental beliefs and decision making about child and adolescent immunization: from polio to sexually transmitted infections. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 441-52. Read More