Coercion And Vaccination Analysis

In 429 B.C. a Greek historian noticed that individuals infected with the virus smallpox did not later become ill with the virus a second time. Much later in China basic forms of vaccinations called variolation were introduced to prevent smallpox. These practices carried on well into the 17th century (The History of . . .). Though smallpox was the most infectious virus and killed twenty percent of infected people, though that tried variolation reported lower fatalities. In1796 Dr. Edward Jenner discovered the modern form of vaccinates and proved its effectiveness. It was not until the 1920s that vaccines became available globally and were important as an official “preventive public health measure,” (The History of . . .). From there debate …show more content…
Numerous battles were fought for the right to exercise one’s own beliefs without interference from governing systems. As Dr. Douglas Opel and Dr. Douglas Diekema recap “. . . it is important to remember that exemptions to vaccine mandates exist in order to reduce perceptions of coercion and interference with parental choice,” (Opel). Forcing parents and children to get injects would be immoral. For everyone in society it is extremely important to have the freedom of choice. So long as the choice at hand does not cause harm to other members of society it should not be dictated for them. “In general, the potential risks of harm to the unimmunized child and other school children do not seem disproportionately great so as to justify disrespecting parental authority by forcing immunization,” explains Dr. Opel. There is no denying that choice is important. However, a person’s health is also important. Currently there are restrictions when obtaining a vaccine exemption. Nonetheless, it could prove beneficial if both parties revisited those restrictions and compromised. Both doctors explain in one sentence what should be done to appease both sides of this long debate. “In the effort to strike a balance between parental autonomy and public health, it seems more appropriate to focus on how we can change, not eliminate, the process of granting personal belief exemptions,”