Slashdot Mirror
UK Court Orders Two Sisters Must Receive MMR Vaccine
rnws writes "The BBC reports that an English High Court judge has ruled that sisters aged 15 and 11 must have the MMR vaccine even though they and their mother do not want it. The High Court decision, made last month, came after the girls' father brought a case seeking vaccination. When outlining her decision in the latest case, Mrs Justice Theis emphasized it was a specific case 'only concerned with the welfare needs of these children', but lawyers say as one of a series it confirms there is no longer any debate about the benefits of the vaccine."
"The BBC reports that an English High Court judge has ruled that sisters aged 15 and 11 must have the MMR vaccine even though they and their mother do not want it. "
No, the kids don't know any better, and the mother is practicing child abuse, especially against the 11 year old.
Brainwashing your kids against vaccination is particularly evil.
--
BMO
I hope so, I don't know why so many people heard of one study, which was proved false, and not the others which disproved it.
You don't drive through red traffic lights. You don't spread your stupid diseases to innocent Children who for GOOD reasons can't be vaccinated. And you don't waste my taxes trying to treat your sick kids because you're too stupid to understand some basic science.
work in progress
I think you will find that more people die from the preventable disease than die from the vaccine.
bullshit. thanks for kindling the fud and feeding the idiots.
Dad and mom do not agree, kids are minors and thus unable to decide for themselves in the eyes of the law, and thus medical evidence breaks the tie. I really don't see the problem here...
IF mom and dad and kids didn't want it and courts were ordering something, then that would be a different story.
Ah, the perfect is the enemy of the good. Thousands die and are injured in traffic accidents every day, and yet I bet you ride in a car or other form of transportation regularly anyway.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
It's unfortunate they made the issue out to be the efficacy of the vaccine and not the moral implications about forcing medication on people against their will. I, like most, believe the autism-MMR link is pure nonsense, but I do believe it must be every person's right to refuse medical treatment, including vaccines. (In the case of children, parents sometimes need to make decisions on their behalf, of course, but it shouldn't be the government making those decisions.) Of course, an exception to that rule can be made if people want the privilege of traveling to certain foreign countries which are known to harbor specific diseases, but otherwise, it should be up to parents, or adults to make these decisions, wrong though they may be.
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Well duh. I didn't want shots either, but luckily for me my parents were sane people and didn't let a ten-year-old make medical decisions.
"confirms there is no longer any debate about the benefits of the vaccine."
How can anyone be stupid enough to believe that a judge ruling has any effect on medical science?
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
The needs of the many outweigh the wishes of the few.
aka Tyranny
I do believe it must be every person's right to refuse medical treatment, including vaccines.
If you've got an infectious disease that has outbreak potential, most legal systems allow doctors to detain you for treatment.
This isn't the same thing, but there's a similar public health factor. It's not a personal decision, given that there are people who CANNOT be vaccinated for whatever reason, and some of these diseases have no "cure" other than prevention.
Most of these outbreaks happen when unvaccinated people travel to other countries where vaccinations aren't commonplace and the diseases are. And they bring it home. That's half the reason your doctor and the Embassy suggest/strongly recommend getting booster shots before traveling to certain places!
Please help metamoderate.
Certainly people have adverse reactions to vaccines, as with any medication; I had a penicillin allergy when I was very young that meant I couldn't get certain standard shots, including (I think) MMR. Fortunately medicine is improving so the likelihood of preventable medication-caused harm is reducing. Here is an article on what we know and what alarmists assume.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Given the innuendo of the clip, one might think we're expected to feel outrage about this because the daughters AND mom don't want it. But guess what? Dad gets a say too, and no; that is not outrageous. Mom must have thought he would be a pretty spiffy father because she slept with him at least twice.
Just because one or both of the parents changed their minds does not mean dad loses his "father" status. His opinion is equal to mom's, and I'm glad the court decision reflected that.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
It's about time all exemptions were removed. It's idiotic to allow them.
Step right this way citizen for your retroviral DNA tagging. Let's see, you're male, so you get this one. The batches are rotated such that if we need to control the population we can release one or more plagues to achieve the desired ratio of males to females or northerners to southerners, etc.
Oh, you want to opt out? Too bad. We got you years ago, this is just a patch for a more efficient marker; Your kids? Oh, you don't get to decide what's best for them. We call that child abuse if you refuse their virus cocktail.
Not saying this shit is going down, but removing exemptions isn't going to limit the spread as much as you think, and the potential cost to freedom is far greater.
Don't want to be around me? Stay the hell indoors then you scared little moron. I accept that Life is a bit Dangerous, and drive my car every day anyway; I even eat at the occasional fast food joint. When the risk to life gets greater than that of auto accidents, then I'll give a fuck about folks opting out of vaccines, or banishing fast food. This blind devotion to prevention of all danger is how PRISM happened, you twit. Live free or die, I say.
The supposed link between autism and vaccination has been exhaustively studied and dismissed. There isn't one.
It just so happens that diagnosis follows vaccination, but why blame vaccination when it might so easily (in the absence of evidence to say otherwise) be - second or first hand smoking during development, or alcohol, or perfume / makeup of the mother, or audio frequencies coming from the TV into the womb, or vibrations during driving, or electro magnetic interference from powerlines, or too much / little sunshine, or vitamin / mineral deficiency, or radon gas, or lack of stimulus or over stimulus etc.
Anti vaxxers have latched onto vaccination because of Andrew Wakefield. Ironically Wakefield was fraudulently attempting to discredit MMR because he had his own measles vaccine which he hope to cash-in on in the aftermath. The one good thing to come from it is that the supposed link between Autism and vaccination was exhaustively studied and no link was found. It's safe to say there isn't one and never was. It's far more likely that improved diagnosis, earlier screening and a lack of critical thinking has created the link in some people's minds.
Also those for whom the vaccination does not work. It turns out that vaccinations are NOT 100% effective. In some people, the vaccination will not provide immunity for whatever reason. Well, there's not really any good way to test this. It's not like we can go in infect people with potentially deadly diseases, just to see if they in fact are immune to those diseases. However, when a large percentage of the population has been vaccinated, the herd immunity acts such that basically nobody gets it since the disease can't find hosts to spread from.
However as the term "herd immunity" implies, it requires a large part of the "herd" to be vaccinated. When too few people are vaccinated, diseases can find enough vectors to spread.
As you note, this isn't just an individual issue this affect society as a whole. There are people who cannot be vaccinated, for various reasons, and there are people who will choose to be vaccinated but the vaccination won't work for, and they don't know. As such is important for as many people as possible to be vaccinated against disease to make sure that it does not spread.
We get all these people who think that vaccines are linked to autism because one discredited scientsts said it was, so we get all this controvercy over vaccines. But what about all the other crap we're putting into our bodies? Hormones in the water supply. Industrial pollutants. Even intentional fluoridation, which has been correlated with lower IQ. But do these people rally against this stuff? No, because it takes too much work. It's easier to go on about government conspiracies and skip going to the doctor.
.... and if they get Measles, Mumps, or Rubella while under the age of 18, their mother must pay for all doctors bills 100% out of pocket, including hospital stays.
Also it if can be proven they they infect anyone else, they must pay the doctor bills of those that can prove it.
Legal fees alone in the defense will fix that.
If they get these after the age of 18, then they should face the same expenses as their mother would.
It's simple repercussions of one's actions.
Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
The court is not really forcing the girls to get the vaccine. This is a case of the mother not wanting the vaccine for her daughters, and the father wanting the vaccine for them. If the father hadn't wanted the vaccination either, then the girls wouldn't be vaccinated. More of a custody dispute than a vaccination dispute...