US Vaccination Controversy

Most people in the United States today have had one experience or another with immunization. For most people, their first experience might have been before they could remember, as a newborn, receiving one of the many scheduled pediatric vaccinations against communicable diseases that the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC) recommend. This experience might have been with their children who had to meet certain vaccination requirements before entering school. Currently the CDC recommends that children in the United States receive 23 vaccinations against 11 communicable diseases before they reach kindergarten age (Mera et al, 2009, p 79). There have long been reasons why some parents make a conscious decision to not vaccinate their children. Sometimes, this decision is not made out of a deliberate attempt to keep their children from being immunized but stems from reasons such as lack of knowledge about vaccination recommendations or a lack of access to healthcare. Recent media reports questioning the safety of some vaccinations has led to more controversy and confusion among parents and healthcare workers alike on the issue of immunization. The nurse plays a key role in the implementation of the CDC’s vaccination program and has a responsibility to her patients in providing accurate and up to date information on vaccination issues. This paper will attempt to examine the issues surrounding current vaccination practices in the United States, specifically pediatric immunizations, and why this is a controversial and dynamic issue and specifically what role the professional nurse plays.

One of the most critical questions about vaccination is its hypothetical aftereffects. Many parent’s express concerns about the number of injection which their children have to endure. In their opinion, this can give rise to various complications such as seizures, autism or encephalopathy (Sharts-Hopko, 2009, p 83). However, according to the most recent findings, human body has the capacity to respond to an large amount of antigens and their actual number is much lower than it was several decades ago (Sharts-Hopko, 2009, p 85). To some extent, this example demonstrates some of the claims are not substantiated. In turn, this creates serious difficulties to the medical workers, who find hard to convince parents that vaccination is safe. Such attitude of parents can also be explained by the fact that the side-effects of immunization have not been thoroughly examined. In the vast majority of cases, scientists only associate vaccination with some diseases, for instance, neurologic adverse events, low birth weight of the infant or subsequent attention deficit (Francois et al 2005, p 953). However, they cannot state with certainty vaccinations actually cause these disorders. Due to this ambiguity vaccines are regarded as the main source of many health problems. Hence, continuous research is needed in order to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of vaccination of children.

Naturally, the risks of immunization may not be denied or neglected. For example, several systemic reviews report the increased occurrence of leukemia following hepatitis B immunization (Sharts-Hopko, 2009, p 8). These two phenomena may be related to one another as cause and effect. But at present the evidence is inconclusive. Overall, this uncertainty only increases parental reluctance to participate. Therefore, the key task of nurses is to explain that vaccination is an effective method for the prevention of contagious diseases, and misgivings about them are not fully grounded. Yet, at the same time, they need to tell parents about those hypothetical dangers so that they could make an informed decision and this is one of their major moral and professional duties.

Another reason why so many parents are reluctant to immunize their children is that vaccination against some diseases, such as chicken pox is not quite necessary (Bar-Yam & Bromberg, 2000, p 41). This is one of those cases, when the consequences of infection are not so severe; they are very rarely fatal. Additionally, it is even much preferable to pass through this illness at childhood age because during adolescence or adulthood chicken pox may be much more dangerous. This examples shows that healthcare professionals must use vaccines only in those cases, when the disease is both contagious and perilous the childs health. This may minimize the risk of many health problems.

The ongoing debate about natural immunity and vaccination has not been resolved yet. Some scholars even argue that immunization does not actually bring the decline of diseases (Miller 1994, as cited in Bar-Yam & Bromberg, 2000, p 40). They explain it by the fact that socioeconomic and sanitary conditions of life have improved. Nonetheless, several attempts to reduce the rate of vaccination proved to be disastrous, for example in the UK or Japan (Bar-Yam & Bromberg, 2000, p 40). Paradoxically, the effectiveness of many vaccines leads to the belief that it is no longer necessary to immunize children. In fact, this is one of the major vaccine controversies. Judging from this discussion, one may say that medical workers should carefully assess the danger of any contagious disease in order to decide whether immunization should be compulsory or not.

Apart from that, it should be borne in mind that some parents simply cannot afford vaccination because they do not have insurance. Hence, it is very important that health care professionals develop strategies which would reduce the expenses; these people should refer to various governmental agencies which give provide free vaccinations (Fraleigh, 2009, p 38). Still, it seems that financial difficulties are not the most formidable obstacle. The underlying cause of parents unwillingness to participate in such programs is the fear of potential risks and most importantly lack of awareness. Therefore, the role of medical workers and particularly nurses becomes crucial.

One of their major tasks is to talk to parents about their concerns. They need to get a better understanding of immunization and its benefits. Unfortunately, very often its importance is significantly underestimated by the community. The patients also have a right to know about the alleged risks of such injections (Sharts-Hopko, 2009). The main objective of parent education is to dispel those myths about immunization, created by mass media. It is also essential that parents or legal guardians are informed about the options they have. The same contagious diseases can be prevented by different vaccines. Some of them may be more or less efficient and this data must be made available to parents. Perhaps, this explanatory work will make people more favorable of vaccination. Unfortunately, nowadays they have very few opportunities to learn more about these questions. So, it is surprising that they refuse to cooperate with medical workers.

Besides, nurses should also take into account that some children may have an allergy to the drugs, thus, they must ensure that this vaccine is compatible with a childs physical state. In this respect, we need to mention immunization of those children who are ill with fever or respiratory tract infections. Scholars believe that they must not receive any injection until recovery (Sharts-Hopko, 2009, p 86). However, under some circumstances parents may not even know that their child is ill especially at early stages of the disease. This is why nurses must pay close attention to such symptoms as high temperature, increased perspiration, fatigue, and others. Actually, the exact aftereffects of vaccination during illness have not been identified, but it is better to be on the safe side. Finally, it is crucial that nurses are familiar with the most recent findings in this field. There is a vast amount of scholarly works dedicated to the study of vaccines and healthcare professionals have bring their knowledge up-to-date.

On the whole, vaccination still remains of the most efficient methods of disease prevention and immunization. Despite the fact that it is often associated with severe complications, its benefits outweigh the risks. The debate about vaccination is stimulated by the newspapers and television, however, there is no conclusive evidence indicating that such form of immunization is hazardous. Therefore, nurses need to tell parents that their fears are usually not grounded. At the same time, parents should also know about the risks associated with a particular vaccine. As healthcare consumers they need to be well-informed of all these issues. As it has been noted before, nurses must be knowledgeable about the recommendations, made by different medical organizations; their practice must be evidence-based. This may enable medical workers to overcome parental reluctance and reduce the risk of complications to a minimum.

Reference List

Bar-Yam; & Bromberg, N. (2000). Political Issues: Calling the Shots; A Brief Look at the Vaccination Controversy. International Journal of Childbirth EducationVol. 15Issue 1, p39-41.

Fraleigh, J. M. (2009). Vaccination: Compliance and Controversary. RN, pp 36-40.

Francis,G., Duclos, P., Margolis, H., Lavanchy, D., Siegrist, C., Meheus, A., Lambert, P., Emiroglu, N., Badur, S. & Van Damme, P.(2005). Vaccine Safety Controversies and the Future of Vaccination Programs. The Pediatric InfectiousDisease Journal, vol. 24, issue 11, pp 953-961.

Mera, K. E. & Hackley, B. (2003). Childhood Vaccines: How Safe Are They? AJN, vol. 103, issue. 2, pp 79 – 88.

Sharts-Hopko, N. C. (2009). Issues in Pediatric Immunization. MCN. vol.34 , pp 80-88.

Child Vaccination Program Evaluation: Project L.O.V.E

The program to be evaluated is the Child vaccination program (Project L.O.V.E) based in Ohio Columbia. The children vaccination project deals with promoting public health among the residents of Columbia and specifically ensuring that the children who are less than two years old are brought up healthily. Thus, the evaluation will be carried out sequentially regarding the project’s objectives. The evaluation will also embark on the target group especially the children. The reason for the project targeting children is because society’s long-term health status is determined by the present care given to the children. The mission of the children’s vaccination program in Columbia is intended to address all the health problems affecting the whole society thus blanketing all the age groups.

The program being evaluated has various objectives and they intend to achieve them by identifying the health threats and precedence in the target groups. The children have health challenges that are different from those of adults. Therefore, the program intends to establish each of the requirements in order to provide appropriate care and protection to both groups. Additionally, it intends to work hand in hand with people and stakeholders in the communities in Columbia. The local authorities and policy developers are going to help the program reach the affected target groups. The residents will also help provide the necessary information to cover the health gaps and difficulties experienced in the Ohio community.

Moreover, the Columbia public health program intends to reach out to the residents of the area and educate them on good living. it will be implemented through empowerment programs and health seminars for women in Ohio to show commitment to all clients. The intention of the health program is not only to provide services to ordinary people but also to reach out to the affected ones. The target was to treat at least 200 people in the Ohio communities within a period of one month. This is going to be used as exhibit to the stakeholders to offer more support to the program. Consequently, the targeted people will receive capacity-building teachings to acquire knowledge on how to remain healthy. To achieve this, various resources will be mobilized to offer continuous support to ensure quality health standards.

The implementation of these objectives will be done in various stages. First, the residents are going to be taught on reducing their intake of foods that could be harmless to their health. An example of a poor condition that results from food consumption is obesity and overweight. The couples among the stakeholders will be educated concerning the appropriate family planning and postnatal care to reduce the infant death rate. The implementation of vaccines will be done to reduce the spread of infectious diseases among children. Thus, all appropriate vaccines will be administered to children aged between one and two years. Moreover, various hospitals and medical centers shall be improved and equipped with advanced equipment thus reducing the distances to major towns and getting access to the medical services from the nearby health care centers. The project would also prioritize the implementation of departmental restructuring to decentralize the health operation in Ohio. The various implementation strategies will include all the stakeholders in the community.

The various stakeholder’s participation includes medical practitioners creating awareness to the residents, the parents teaching their children on good health standards, and other experts taking part in the construction and management of health centers. The program will reinforce healthy behaviors by ensuring all food chains are stocked with balanced nutrition proportions of foods. Follow-up would be initiated to all the homesteads once every month to check on the well-being of the family members. This will be done for at least one year to ensure all people learn and uphold the importance of healthy behaviors.

The Columbia Ohio logic model is developed to focus on the important health matters that affect the clients. Stakeholders also target to achieve common applications on the acquisition of drugs and health care. The targeted clients for this logic model are the small children who suffer most the childhood diseases. Specific strategies for the logic model in the L.O.V.E project target to support continuous moderated health improvement for the affected children. The model strategy also promotes continued communication between the clients and the health professionals. In the long run, various families in the Ohio neighborhood are to benefit from the plan and infant mortality rates are to be reduced. The ultimate achievement for the project organization is to increase professional accountability. Consequently, accountability by the organization is intended to provide confidence to the clients that they are cared for.

Logic model for the health program in Ohio Columbia
Logic model for the health program in Ohio Columbia.

Vaccination Belonging to the Sphere of Quantitative Research

Introduction

Research design is an inevitable part of any type of research since the ideas, the flow of study, and the results obtained should be presented in readable and scientifically literate form. The division of research into two broad categories of qualitative and quantitative research accounts for the choice the present topic. The paper analyzes the research design of a set of peer reviewed articles devoted to vaccination that belong to the sphere of quantitative research.

Main Body

In their article, Findley et al. study the interrelation of coalition of community and improvement of child vaccination rates in New York. The researchers make use of “retrospective, matching, birth cohort design” in order to present an evaluation of a comprehensive childhood immunization program of “outreach, education, and reminders in a Latino community”. (Findley et al., 2008, p. 1959). The design of the article satisfies basic demands since it presents accurate and clear information of the main sections. As for the methodology used, the scientist applied “quasi-experimental, retrospective, birth cohort design” (Findley et al, 2008, p. 1960). They made use of the hospital data and the New York Citywide Immunization Registry. The article reports about the software used in the research. Thus, methodology section covers all methods used. As for the results of the study, they are presented at the beginning of the article and the rest of the article shows the flow of the research. A concise but informative conclusion states that “reminders, tracking, and outreach” improve the analyzed immunization rates.

The article by Ndirangu et al. dwells on the state of childhood vaccination in rural areas of Southern Africa and establishes the ties between the level of immunization and HIV status of the mothers of the children. The methods used by the authors in the research are mainly statistical. They analyze the data concerning 2431 children (Ndirangu, 2009, p. 1383) applying the data to five types of vaccination. The design of the article reflects all stages of the research in a proper order. The methods used are mainly numerical. The results are presented in percentage ratio and recommendations concerning the increase of vaccination coverage are given.

The third article by Nitch-Osuch concerns the coverage of influenza vaccine in risk groups determined by age in Poland. The authors have performed a qualitative analysis of data provided by National Institute of Hygiene, National Institute of Public Health and Central Statistical Office (Nitch-Osuch, 2009, p. 198). The design of the article follows the flow of the research conducted and ends with the results based on the quantitative analysis. The main method used in the research is qualitative analysis of the data provided by above mentioned official sources. The quantitative results are presented in percentage form along with the authors’ concern about worsening situation caused by low level of vaccination of children in Poland.

The theme of vaccination is extremely popular in peer reviewed sources. As for the additional sources to study, the sources that are mentioned below offer non trivial information on vaccination.

The article by Khare et al. (2006) is aimed at evaluation of usefulness of registry data to support missing vaccination data (p. 838).

The article by Blank, Schwenkglenks, and Szucs (2009) is devoted to the measurement of the rates of vaccination coverage in the risk groups certain European countries (p. 390).

The article by Nowalk et al. (2009) offers information about the connection of racial factors with the state of immunization of adult population (p. 1052).

The article by Talbot (2009) studies the ties between the vaccination rates of healthcare personnel and declination statements (p. 773).

The article by Shah and Davis (2009) dwells on a community pertussis outbreak and the increase of vaccination of infants caused by this factor (p. 2260).

Conclusion

Thus, the material analyzed shows that the topic of vaccination coverage rates is an urgent topic that inspires research. The analysis has shown that quantitative research is effective when studying vaccination coverage rates.

Reference List

Blank, P.R., Schwenkglenks, M, & Szucs T.D. (2009). Disparities in Influenza Vaccination Coverage Rates by Target Group in Five European Countries: Trends Over Seven Consecutive Seasons. Clinical and Epidemiological Study. 5, 390-400.

Findley, S.E. et al. (2008). Effectiveness of a Community Coalition for Improving Child Vaccination Rates in New York City. American Journal of Public Health, 98(11), 1959-1963.

Khare, M. et al. (2006). Assessment of Immunization Registry Databases as Supplemental Sources of Data to Improve Ascertainment of Vaccination Coverage Estimates in the National Immunization Survey. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160(8), 838.

Ndirangu, J. et al. (2009). Levels of Childhood Vaccination Coverage and the Impact of Maternal HIV Status in Rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Tropical Medicine and International Health, 14(11), 1383.

Nowalk, M.P., Tabbarah, M., Terry, M.A., Raymund, M. et al. (2009). Using Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Understanding Racial Disparities in Adult Vaccination. Journal of the National Medical Association, 101(10), 1052-1061.

Nitsch-Osuch, A., & Wardyn K. (2009). Influenza Vaccine Coverage in Age-related Risk Groups in Poland, 2004-2007. Central European Journal of Public Health, 17(4), 198-203.

Shah, S.S., & Davis, (2009). M.M. Old Disease, Innovative Response: Accelerating Infant Vaccination During a Community Pertussis Outbreak. JAMA, 301(21), 2260.

Talbot, T.R. (2009). Do Declination Statements Increase Health Care Workers Influenza Vaccination Rates? Clinical Infectious Diseases, 49(5), 773.

Why Adults Should Be Vaccinated

Introduction

Vaccinations are generally meant to strengthen the body’s immunity against diseases caused by pathogens. Although they are mostly administered to small children, it is important to ensure that adults are also vaccinated because of the risk they are exposed to as they grow old. My thesis statement is that adults should be vaccinated. Drawing from a study by Greenberg (2012), older people should be vaccinated in order to protect them from diseases that can be prevented through vaccination. This paper presents reasons to support the vaccination of adults.

Population is Living Longer

Elderly Can Have Weaker Immune Systems

Although children are easily infected by cold and other similar illnesses, their immune system is strong and thus able to fight off the infections in a few days (Harvard Health Publications, 2013). Unlike children, elderly people have a weak immune system that makes it difficult for them to deal with such infections. This is due to the fact that the immune system weakens as individuals grow older. The fight against infections may thus be lost over the years unless preventive measures are taken.

Generally, the immune system consists of cells, organs and tissues that help to keep individuals healthy. It is made up of innate and adaptive immune systems which change as individuals advance in age. The innate system comprises of cells and barriers that prevent the entrance of germs into the body. It is thus considered as the first line of defense. Unfortunately, the innate system weakens as one grows old since the cells lose the ability to communicate with each other as required. Unlike the innate immune system, adaptive immune system is multifaceted and very complicated. As individuals grow old, cells that are responsible for building immunity weaken and lose the ability to fight infections. For this reason, adults should be vaccinated against infections such as pneumonia, flu, and yellow fever (Harvard Health Publications, 2013).

Education Programs for Vaccines

Immunization programs organized by different individuals and organizations are meant to sensitize people on the importance of vaccinations. The programs may be delivered in different formats including the use of the Internet and television which help to reach a wider audience. Through immunization education programs, it is now obvious to many people that immunization is not only for small children. Adults are equally at risk and must thus be vaccinated to boost their resistance against infections. Clearly, the main agenda of the immunization education programs is to appeal to individuals to take the need for immunization seriously.

Vaccinations Received in Childhood have Expired or Weakened

Booster Vaccines

Since vaccinations administered in childhood weaken with time, it is necessary to consider the administration of booster vaccines as individuals grow older. Generally, the administration of booster vaccines against diseases such as tetanus and diphtheria help to strengthen the immune system among adults. Tetanus is caused by clostridium tetanus bacterium which secretes a neurotoxin that causes painful muscular spasms. It may be caused by a contaminated wound or a trivial injury that remains unnoticed for a long time. Although tetanus vaccination is given to children and babies, tetanus boosters are recommended for adults aged fifty years and above. Ostensibly, adults should be given boosters after every ten years (Kau, Hughes & Sadowski, 2011).

Diphtheria is another infection that is common among adults. It has serious health implications that can lead to death if not treated early. The disease infects the upper part of the respiratory tract as well as other important parts of the human body. Diphtheria vaccinations are recommended for children and infants while adults aged fifty years and above should receive boosters.

Previous Epidemic Level Diseases are on the Rise

Research also indicates that previous epidemic level diseases are on the rise. As a consequence, the vaccination of adults should be encouraged. Failure to vaccinate adults against such diseases will leave subject them to serious risks of infection. It is thus imperative to ensure that adults are vaccinated to strengthen their immunity. This is regardless of whether an individual was immunized as a child. Because of the increased prevalence of epidemic level diseases, adults should be vaccinated in order to ensure their safety. As has already been explained, the immune system of human beings weakens with time and timely vaccination is very critical for the survival of older people.

Vaccinations Provide Preventative Care

Flu and Pneumonia Vaccines

The best protection against serious infections like flu and pneumonia is through vaccination. Flue is a viral disease that causes headache, fever, muscle aches, cough and tiredness. Because of the risks associated with flu, vaccination is recommended for any person aged sixty five years and above (Kau, Hughes & Sadowski, 2011). Arguably, these individuals are prone to flu because of weak immunity. Generally, allergic reactions caused by flu vaccinations are very rare. This notwithstanding, allergic reactions may be encountered by individuals who are allergic to eggs since the vaccination contains egg proteins (Harvard Health Publications, 2013). Since the flu virus changes quite frequently, it is advisable for adults to be vaccinated every year (Kau, Hughes & Sadowski, 2011). Apparently, the vaccination is made up of different virus strains every year.

Pneumonia is another complicated health problem that can cause death among adults with weak immunity. It is thus advisable for adults aged sixty five years and above to be vaccinated against pneumonia. Vaccination against pneumonia is also an important consideration for people who smoke. Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination is usually given to adults to protect them against twenty three strains that cause diseases in adults. Allegedly, the vaccination is seventy percent effective in protecting individuals from pneumococcal diseases. In addition, cases of allergic reactions are minimal. Normally, the vaccination is a single booster shot given after five years to ensure continuous protection against the disease (Kau, Hughes & Sadowski, 2011).

Vaccinations before Traveling Abroad

Generally, people worry about the risk of infection as they travel to foreign places. Considering that the idea of being infected can be very scary for travelers, it is imperative to spend time educating them on what they should do in order to stay safe. When traveling to the developing world, vaccinations against yellow fever and meningitis are very vital. As a matter of fact, travelers may be denied entry into some countries if they fail to obtain these vaccinations before traveling. Apparently, the strict measures are meant to limit the transmission of infections from one country to another (Harvard Health Publications, 2013). The measures are also meant to protect individuals from acquiring infections that are not found in their home countries.

Conclusion

Without a doubt, the arguments presented in this paper clearly indicate that the vaccination of adults is very important and must be taken seriously. As has been explained, an individual’s immune system weakens as he or she grows older. For this reason, the vaccination of adults must not be ignored. Adults should be vaccinated in order to boost their immunity. To avoid uncertainties, any person traveling abroad should be vaccinated.

References

Greenberg, S. A. (2012). Immunizations for Older Adults. Web.

Harvard Health Publications (2013). Vaccinations: Myth vs. Reality. Harvard Women’s Health Watch, 20(12), 5.

Kau, L., Hughes, C. & Sadowski, C. A. (2011). Vaccinations in Older Adults: Focus on Pneumococcal, Influenza and Herpes Zoster Infections. Canadian Pharmacists Journal, 144(3), 132 – 141.

Children’s Vaccination and Immunization in Sweden

There is no doubt that vaccination is essential for a child’s health; unless a child is exposed to a certain vaccination at a specific age for his/her organism to develop the antibodies which will be necessary to decrease the chances to contract the disease in question in the future, the outcomes can be rather drastic. It must be admitted, though, that in Sweden, the issue of vaccination is taken extremely seriously. According to the existing research and pieces of evidence concerning the issue of children’s vaccination and immunization, the aim of the above-mentioned procedures is to ensure that the child will not contract a specific disease in the future. According to Barklay et al., “The aim of vaccination programs is to increase the number of immune people in a population, and if that is achieved, a greater proportion of the parasite population will be evolving in immune hosts” (Barklay et al.). Therefore, it can be considered that vaccination and immunization of children in Sweden are aimed not only at making the vaccinated children healthier but also at making the people of next-generation resistant to certain types of diseases.

As has been mentioned above, there are strong reasons to believe that vaccination is essential for children’s health. Since vaccination prevents people from contracting diseases in the future, it seems crucial to make sure that children are vaccinated properly. The issue of vaccination and immunization of children in Sweden has become especially important in light of the recent statistics provided by the Swedish Health Department. As the recent report says, “The National Board has recently initiated a revision of the schedule of the national vaccination program, especially with the reference to pertussis and diphtheria immunity” (Carlsson). Since diphtheria has become a serious threat to Swedish children, immunization and vaccination are crucial at present.

According to the recently established schedule for vaccination and immunization approved by the Swedish Health Department, the vaccination schedule for children in Sweden includes vaccination against DTaP, IPV, PCV, MMR, HPV, BCG, HepB and dTAP. It is essential to mention that vaccinations against BCG and HepB are conducted on the day the child is born. As for the rest of the vaccinations, children are vaccinated against DTaP, IPV and PCV several times, namely, at the age of three months, 5 months, and a year. At the age of 18 months, children are vaccinated against MMR. When the Swedish children reach 5–6 years, they get only the DTaP and IPV vaccines; occasionally, at 6, a Swedish child can also have an MMR vaccine, but the MMR vaccination age stretches from 6 to 8; MMR vaccination is also injected at 12. When Swedish children reach 10, they have the DTaP vaccine again, and will also be vaccinated against HPV at 10-12. The final MMR vaccination comes when a child reaches 12. Last, but definitely not least, dTap vaccination must be provided at 14-16 (Childhood Vaccination Schedule).

Despite the fact that the question of necessity in vaccination and immunization has been raised quite a lot, there is still no doubt that without vaccination and immunization, there would have been a number of problems concerning children’s health. According to the existing evidence, the Swedish children who were not vaccinated against measles were caught in a sweeping epidemic of measles registered in 2007 (Kulane, Johansson, Robleh and Bågenholm 2).

There is no secret that the reasonability of vaccination has been debated for quite a long (Reid). However, it is still clear that at present, there is no alternative way to protect children from developing diseases in the future other than offering vaccination. Hence, in every case of vaccination, the individual specifics of a child’s organism must be taken into account to prevent negative vaccination effects.

References

Barklay, Victoria C. et al. The Evolutionary Consequences of Blood-Stage Vaccination on the Rodent Malaria Plasmodium chabaudi. n. d. Web.

Carlsson, Maria. Sweden. n. d. Web.

Childhood Vaccination Schedule n. d. Web.

Kulane, Asli, Annika Johansson, Idill Robleh and Gunnel Bågenholm. Somali Parents’ Acceptance of MPR Vaccination for Their Children: An Exploratory Study. 2007. Web.

Reid, Sue. 2012. Web.

Health Care Policy: HPV Vaccination

Introduction

Policymaking is a significant task in all spheres of life. It encompasses education and health care among others. However, several factors must be considered to achieve success. These include actors (major players), context, content, and process of policymaking. Of great importance is health policy triangle. Health policy triangle is significant because it forms the core of policymaking. Moreover, it serves to ensure analysis of policy. This paper will explore understanding of health policy. In addition, the paper will explore its application models (Colgrove, 2006, p. 2389-2391).

Analysis of the issue

Health policy triangle

Policymaking involves a number of processes and players. In this regard, states play an important role in influencing changes in health policy. Moreover, for one to have a complete understanding of policymaking, its content, process of making policy, as well as context must be properly identified. These four, content, actors, context, and process make up policy analysis triangle (with actors at the centre of policy triangle). Moreover, this involves exploring the role of power in health policy. To achieve this, one must identify groups that make up both global and national society. This will help in understanding their interrelations as well as influence on health policy. Furthermore, this involves an understanding of how health policy can be formulated. In addition, it is necessary to note that context of interaction between actors in policymaking must also be identified. This is therefore very important as it can be modelled for application in low, middle, as well as high-income countries. Again, to succeed in this, it is important to note that actors are usually influenced by their context (context where they live as well as work). In this regard, it is important to note that countries have varying contexts and this amount to differences between policies in them. Health policy triangle is therefore important in providing a road map for policymaking process. The four main components of a policy triangle are explained below.

Actors

Actors are central to any policy making process. Actors drive process of policymaking. They may be individuals, pressure groups, organisations, and government, among others. They also influence reform process. Actors may be categorised as non-state of state actors. In most cases, non-state actors work to influence formal political powers like legislators to drive policy-making process. For instance in the HPV (Human Papillomavirus) vaccine policy, actors were Beverly Hammerstrom, Gardasil, Merck, focus on family, Michigan State law makers, parents and research CDC agency, which conducted research on its reliability. It is important that these actors among others play a big role in influencing formulation of health policy (Wain, 2008, p. 501-502).

Content

Content of a policy is also essential as it influences other factors. In this regard, it is necessary that content is marched up to its objectives of health policy. For instance, policy on HPV vaccine seeks to make it compulsory for girls to be provided with the vaccine before sixth grade. They believe that it works successfully when done before they become sexually active. Moreover, this vaccine is aimed at preventing cervical cancers in girls. These elements are important in understanding content of the policy (Kulasingam, Connelly, Conway, Hocking, Myers, Regan, Roder, Ross & Wain, 2007, p. 165-175).

Context

The context within which health policies are made is also very important. Context influences actors on which side to support. This may range from settings, culture, ideology, or instability, among others. For instance, it can be noted that this policy was first passed in Michigan State. These include Structural context (role of CDC to provide credible research on need for HPV vaccines), Situational context (role of Senator Hammerstrom to create the motion) and cultural (parents who feel that this would conflict their religious beliefs), among others (Shiffman, Skarbalo & Subotic, 2002, p. 625-642).

Process

Process of policymaking sums up all channels followed to come up with the policy. This begins with identification of the problem, formulation of policy, negotiation, adoption, implementation, and evaluation. For instance, in the case of HPV vaccines, the problem is cervical cancer in girls, which is on rise in the United States. After some research, Merck comes up with an ideal method for preventing cervical cancer. CDC researches this, among other health agencies. The FDA (Food and Drug administration agency licenses it); the senator introduces the bill which is passed by lawmakers. This happens after thorough negotiations that involve major players (actors). This policy is implemented after approval and after evaluation for its effectiveness (Kent, 2006, p. 1-16).

Conclusion

Health sector contributes significantly to world’s economy. Therefore, health policy making takes a central role in most countries. Need for policymaking is necessitated by numerous actors with conflicting interests as well as political cleavage, which is reluctant to control health sector. However, it is important to note that once enough consultation is done, policy-making process is usually successful. Moreover, it is quite necessary that policy-making triangle be followed to achieve success as seen in the two examples. In addition, policy triangle allows for analysis of /for policy (Walt & Gilson, 1994, p. 353-370).

References

Colgrove, J. (2006). The Ethics and Politics of Compulsory HPV Vaccination. New England journal of medicine, 355(49), 2389-2391. Web.

Kent, B. (2006). Health policy framework (chapter 1). In B. Kent, M. Nicholas & W. Walt. 2005. Making Health Policy (pp. 1-16). Maidenhead, England: Open University Press

Kulasingam, S., Connelly, L., Conway, E., Hocking, J., Myers, E., Regan, D., Roder, D., Ross, J. & Wain, G. (2007). A cost-effectiveness analysis of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Cancer Screening Program. Sexual Health, 4(1), 165–175.

Shiffman, J., Skarbalo, M. & Subotic, J. (2002). Reproductive rights and the state in Serbia and Croatia. Social science and Medicine, 54(1), 625-642.

Wain, G. (2008). “I want the one for older women” — extending the human papillomavirus vaccine population base. MJA, 188 (9), 501-502.

Walt, G. & Gilson, I. (1994). Reforming the health sector in developing countries: the central role of policy analysis. Health policy and Planning, 9(1), 353-370.

Pertussis Outbreak and Vaccination Against It

The vaccination against whooping cough given to infants remains crucial to the future health of babies. The vaccination against Pertussis prevents severe whooping cough among children during childhood and adulthood. The fact that the media widely reports on issues related to whooping cough plays a critical role in enhancing public knowledge. It is agreeable that vaccination should start when children are about two months old. However, it is regrettable that constant changes which take place within the society have altered peoples’ original perception about Pertussis vaccination. Society believes that the vaccine causes autism in children. Consequently, some parents avoid taking their children for vaccination from a young age.

The statistics provided by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) about the new outbreaks are agreeable. Infants who experience under vaccination contribute to the present high whooping cough outbreak rate. Under vaccination entails completely missing the vaccine doses. It also entails receiving the vaccine after the planned time for administration has passed. I agree with the assertion that under vaccination of infants leads to high Pertussis. On the contrary, fewer children who receive the dosage also develop whooping cough. The general public must change their perception about whooping cough vaccination to contain the outbreak.

It is disagreeable that vaccination of children against epidemic illnesses according to dosage administration plans to enhance the effectiveness of vaccines. The administration of the Pertussis vaccine at the right time as spelled out in the administration plan makes it highly effective. Giving 5 doses of the DTaP (Diptheria, Tetanus and acellular Pertussis) over 5 years to a patient remain effective even during the periods after the administration of the dosage. This paper agrees with the suggestion that vaccines impart life-long immunity. However, Pertussis vaccine fails to provide patients with lifelong immunity years following its administration.

These concerns raise questions regarding the possibility of drawing a new schedule for Pertussis vaccination. It is agreeable that the vaccination schedule for Pertussis should change in order to ensure maximum effectiveness of the program. CDC has plans to undertake vaccination for children above seven years. I agree with the suggestion because patients who are not fully vaccinated should remain stable for the period beyond the five years. In addition, infants who fail to receive adequate vaccination during the recommended age will receive another vaccination at the age of between 11 and 13 years.

It is true that whooping cough has reappeared in the United States of America affecting the general population. The largest outbreak of Pertussis was recorded in 2012. The new death cases have caused more infants deaths. It is agreeable that infants are dying because of their susceptibility, which arises from under vaccination. Infants also die because their breathing system has not developed satisfactorily. The discovery that Pertussis vaccination dosage loses its effectiveness five years after the administration is debatable. It is notable that under vaccination and lack of response by patients to the drug leads to the development of resistant strains.

This paper supports CDC suggestion that the reduction of whooping cough breakout relies on everyone taking the responsibility to take their babies for vaccination. People who undergo vaccination as a community develop resistance to Pertussis outbreak. The community becomes stronger than one where people fail to receive vaccination. The problem that people face causes them to develop diverse perceptions relates to lack of education.

Vaccination Is Important

Many years of research and experiments showed success in creating vaccines for many infectious diseases, such as measles, rubella, hepatitis A, B, diphtheria, flu, tuberculosis, and many others. While some people see it as a massive step towards the future and improving health care in general, others disagree with the effect and purpose of such experimentation. The invention of vaccines has taken healthcare and humanity to new levels, where infectious diseases have ceased to be the leading cause of death, especially among children. Vaccination is the reason for smallpox existing only within the confines of the laboratory. This disease remains one of the worst sicknesses in human history. It is clear that even though the human immune system can help fight diseases, sometimes it is not strong enough. That is why humanity needs vaccines – to provide extra protection from infections. However, not all people have access to information about vaccines; thus, it is the government’s responsibility to educate them about the matter(“Vaccines and Immunizations,” 2016).

People are born with an immune system that acts in defense of the body from foreign bacteria and viruses. When germs attack the body, the immune system produces a protein, which is called antibodies that fight and eventually kill germs. However, in many cases, especially with viruses, natural immunity has its limits. It occurs due to the deceptive nature of viruses; they hide in the body, making it difficult for antibodies to locate them. By the time when the immune system discovers the virus, it has already increased in size. It causes a further exaggeration of the sickness. The virus, however, while disguised, contains its own unique code. The vaccine contains this code and imparts it to the antibodies in an effort to guide their path to the virus. For example, the smallpox vaccine has smallpox cells in it. They are supposed to teach the immune system to recognize the real disease; thus, enabling it to fight the disease later (“Vaccines and Immunizations,” 2016).

How does it work?

While scientists continue their search for vaccines, the growing popularity of anti-vaccination has begun to emerge. This group has even refused to vaccinate their children, creating further risk to communities and healthcare systems since the vaccination is supposed to minimize vaccine-preventable outbreaks. However, for specific reasons such as religion, personal preference, and mistrust for the healthcare system, people refuse to vaccinate themselves and their children (Manski, 2017). Many of those who do not vaccinate also support the anti-vaccine movement. It remains one of the biggest threats to the U.S. healthcare system, and potentially disfiguring the progress it has achieved in the last hundred years. Whatever the reason, this tendency appeared because people have forgotten how dangerous pandemics can be. Creating vaccines for infectious diseases has decreased past outbreaks in a significant way. A global epidemic has not happened for a hundred years since the Spanish influenza that killed almost fifty million people (Huremović, 2019).

What is the problem?

Among some reasons for people to refuse to vaccinate are the following: religious beliefs, personal beliefs, concerns about safety, and mistrust. Refusal for vaccines in most cases is linked to deeply religious communities, where people believe that any drugs, even ones that cure, are unnatural. Religious people do not only oppose vaccines; they oppose healthcare in general. On the other hand, there are many people who think that a body can fight disease on its own without any help, so they use this personal reason to refuse vaccination. In this case, they claim that people were naturally fighting disease long before developing vaccines. Some think that vaccines are dangerous and can cause autism or even death. However, some people do not trust science and demand more information about the vaccine, how it works, and what the consequences are (Hussain et al., 2018).

Who does not vaccinate

People who refuse to vaccinate for religious or personal beliefs, for safety reasons or mistrust, support the Anti-Vaccine Movement. It started with UK physician Andrew Wakefield who first published research about the measles vaccine that caused autism in children. Other scientists did not find any proof to support his research; therefore, it was criticized in the society; Wakefield was fired, and he lost his right to practice medicine for life. However, his idea gave a significant push to others who were opposing vaccination. Even today, with much existing research and accessibility of information, many people still believe that vaccines are dangerous and untrustworthy (Hussain et al., 2018). The movement has only gotten stronger with time, and it mainly exists in the developed democratic societies (Hussain et al., 2018).

Anti-vaccine Movement

The more people support the Anti-Vaccine Movement, the more power it will gain on the government level. Many times, the US government has introduced a bill for mandatory vaccination of all children who attend public schools and kindergartens. However, the law has never passed because it was opposed by the Anti-Vaccine Movement, whose supporters believe that nobody can dictate what is best for their children, and they have the right for freedom of choice, even when it comes to the health of their children. Therefore, unvaccinated children keep going to public schools and other educational facilities, for example, summer camps. It caused an increase in vaccine-preventable diseases and aggravated the outbreak of seasonal flu. These outbreaks may not be dangerous to healthy people, but some cannot be vaccinated due to existing health conditions (Hussain et al., 2018).

What is going to happen?

There are some groups of people who cannot be vaccinated. Among them are people with pre-existing chronic diseases like cancer, patients with immunosuppressive diseases, like diabetes or HIV, and people who have allergy reactions for the ingredients that are contained in vaccines. These people are in risk groups of being exposed to infectious diseases; moreover, for them, the lethality rate is much higher than for healthy people. Many of those in risk groups are children who attend public schools and kindergartens. Since they cannot take a vaccine shot and have a pre-existing health condition, they are vulnerable to infections and viruses; moreover, they can become carriers for diseases and spread it even further. Therefore, unvaccinated children put their lives in danger and increase the possibility of a community outbreak (Manski, 2017).

Some People Cannot Vaccinate

In 2019 CDC reported 1282 measles cases in 31 states, and in 2020 it has already confirmed 12 cases. Between 2014 and 2019, there have been confirmed 120000 cases of whooping cough, more than 3000 confirmed cases of mumps, more than 30000 cases of hepatitis A. Many of those who were infected were children, and many of them died. Numbers do not look so scary now, but even a hundred years ago, they were a thousand times higher and took the lives of many children and adults. These diseases were supposed to be eliminated with the existing vaccines; however, due to the anti-vaccine movement, community outbreaks happen every year, threatening to become a pandemic. In addition to the mentioned diseases, there is also a seasonal influenza epidemic, which infects more than 50 million people and kills more than 25 thousand of them (“Vaccines and Immunizations,” 2016).

Here are some numbers

Influenza kills around 25 thousand people yearly; many of them are children. People with a weak immune system and pre-existing conditions are indeed in risk groups; however, a lot of people who die from the flu were healthy without any premises. Moreover, in pre-vaccine times flu epidemics were more severe; for example, Spanish flu that took lives of almost 50 million people around the globe. The only infectious disease that was entirely eliminated by vaccination is smallpox, and now it only exists in the laboratories. It is a great achievement for science and humanity in general. Moreover, vaccination prevents up to 1.5 million deaths every year. Unfortunately, people who refuse to vaccinate can disfigure all the effort, because vaccine-preventable outbreaks happen more often lately. (“Vaccines and Immunizations,” 2016).

Vaccines and Immunizations

The Center for Disease Control warns the public about possible pandemics. They say it is not the question of “how” but a matter of “when.” The possibility of new disease outbreaks always exists, and it is the government’s responsibility to be ready. It makes the outbreak of existing and vaccine-preventable diseases at an even higher risk. Since, while the government will put all the effort to control the epidemic that could be prevented by vaccination, there would be no resources to avoid the possibility of unknown virus appearing. The situation the public can currently see with the COVID-19 outbreak is exactly what epidemiologists were warning against. Moreover, the situation is unclear, and it is unknown how existing diseases would behave in combination with the new virus (“Vaccines and Immunizations,” 2016).

Consequences

Refusal to vaccinate has a direct impact on public health and the whole healthcare system. It creates favorable conditions for not only spreading the disease but also for its future mutations. However, most importantly, it has a significant influence on the healthcare system. The main stakeholders in this situation are doctors who work directly with sick people. During the seasonal flu, their shifts last up to 72 hours, which also affects their health and suppresses their immune system. At the times of epidemic, medical staff is exposed to the infection to the greatest extent, and they would be the first to get sick. The question that supporters of the Anti-Vaccine Movement should ask is who will treat them if all doctors are ill (Camargo & Grant, 2015).

Consequences

Outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases usually happen in countries where the vaccination rate is low. Sadly, the United States is of countries that had the most significant vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks in the last 25 years. Therefore, the government tries to implement different strategies to make the public aware of the consequences of epidemics. For example, sociologists study human behavior to find the algorithm of actions that would help them to improve the vaccination rate. However, it does not tend to strengthen the situation, since more and more people every year start to support anti-vaccine movements and oppose the scientific progress in medicine. The problem seems to be that the strategies are focused on pursuing people to vaccinate, instead of educating them on the matter (Camargo & Grant, 2015).

How to make people vaccinate

So far, it is clear that mandatory vaccination by law, fines, and force are not good enough strategies to make the Anti-Vaccine Movement to cool down. However, one approach showed positive results – it is education. The best way to make people accept something or change their view is to tell them everything about the matter. Information about vaccine-preventable outbreaks and a subject of a pandemic should be accessible not only for scholarly purposes but in mass media as well. People must hear and watch it so that they know what it is. Moreover, it should be taught at schools so that children growing up know about causes, effects, and how to prevent spreading infectious diseases. Education is the key to changing people’s position in refusing to vaccinate (Manski, 2017).

People must know

The lack of educational information makes people do their own research. Since there is a lot of available misinformation about vaccinating online, people tend to read and believe it. People must know how to distinguish misleading sources from the actual scientific conclusion so that they understand what vaccines are and how they work. Moreover, many people trust opinions, public figures, and celebrities, or even the expertise of their charismatic friends. Often, if somebody famous is against vaccination, many others would believe his or her knowledge. It is crucial for government and public health officials to cooperate with such people. Using mass media and advertising for promoting vaccination would have a positive impact on vaccination rates. The government also should consider putting more funding into human behavior research. (Camargo & Grant, 2015).

Misinformation

In democratic countries, like the U.S. mandatory vaccination is not the key strategy for controlling vaccine-preventable diseases. Since most countries in the world are democratic, it is people’s right to chose what to think and which ideas to support. As long as the concept of freedom of choice exists, there will always be people who believe that their rights are violated. If the government forbids non-vaccinated children to attend schools, they will most likely be home-schooled. The result of it could be them growing up and believing that vaccination is not necessary to live in society, which would harm future generations and potentially cause more outbreaks. It is essential that children receive proper education and understand the causes and effects of their choices on the community (Hussain et al., 2018).

Mandatory vaccination is not the key

The bill presented in the U.S. Congress about mandatory vaccination of all children who attend public school has a few exceptions, such as religious and personal preferences, health condition, and intolerance for ingredients contained in the vaccine. These exceptions allow people to refuse to vaccinate their children. Moreover, the government attempted to allow teenagers under the age of 18 to vaccinate if they want to, but their parents opposed it. It is clear at this point that even if the bill passes, people will resist its implementation. Therefore, the mandatory vaccination as the leading measure will not be sufficient enough to improve vaccinating rates in the U.S. Extra steps must be taken to ensure the safety of the community and t avoid an outbreak (Wilson, 2019).

Mandatory vaccination will not work

To find and implement an effective solution for improving vaccination rates, firstly, the specific audience must be determined. In this case, groups of people to be addressed are parents and students of all ages. Parents desire to protect their children, so they must be addressed and educated on the matter of vaccination accordingly. Most of the people who support the anti-vaccine movement are parents who believe that vaccines are dangerous and deadly. Therefore, it is essential to help them learn how vaccines work and what its purpose is, more importantly, how it will protect their kids. In terms of students, the earlier they know about vaccination as an essential tool for preventing sickness, the more chance they would make the right choice in the future.

Vaccination Is Important

An effective way to address parents and children and promoting vaccination would be advertising, posters, public appearances of famous figures, and mass media. It is essential to encourage vaccination not only in hospitals and clinics but also in schools, public places, theatres, shopping malls, and other places that the majority of people attend. As for students, educational facilities should implement a course about the necessity of vaccinating in the curriculum. It would not only increase the level of information but also encourage many students to do their research and spread the information further to their friends and relatives. Moreover, the posters with people who contracted vaccine-preventable diseases must be seen everywhere, so that people understand possible consequences. It is hard to change the opinion of adults; thus, it is better to focus on educating the younger generation.

Be Great Vaccinate

Postponing vaccination puts one’s family, friends, and neighbors in danger. It is a fact that infectious diseases spread through clusters of families and friends, and today mostly occur in communities where the majority of people are not vaccinated (Camargo & Grant, 2015). Moreover, one always has close contact with people who have health conditions and cannot receive a vaccine. Therefore, one postponing or refusing to get the vaccine from infectious diseases may be the reason for threatening somebody else’s life. Standing for one’s personal and religious beliefs is a good thing, but everybody’s preferences cannot be considered at the same time; thus, there should be only one goal left – to take care of each other. If people want to live in society peacefully, they must put their personal or religious preferences aside and take care of the common welfare. Otherwise, the cost of neglect could go far beyond expectations.

Warning

To conclude, developing vaccines has brought humanity to a new level of disease control. It has significantly decreased the death rate from infectious sickness, which was the leading cause of death in the past. However, many people do not support vaccination for religious and personal beliefs, or due to their mistrust of the health care system. It can be crucial for the health care system and cause vaccine-preventable outbreaks to occur more often. It is essential to educate the public on the possible consequences of contracting infectious diseases so that they understand its effect on health. Mandatory vaccination is not sufficient enough to promote vaccinating. Therefore the government must take extra steps and use more resources, such as advertising in mass media and public appearances of famous people. These additional extra steps can help to teach the population about the importance of vaccination.

Conclusion

References

Camargo, K., & Grant, R. (2015). Public health, science, and policy debate: Being right is not enough. American Journal of Public Health, 105(2), 232–235. Web.

Huremović, D. (2019). Brief history of pandemics (Pandemics throughout history). Psychiatry of Pandemics, 7–35. Web.

Hussain, A., A., S., Ahmed, M., & Hussain, S. (2018). The anti-vaccination movement: A regression in modern medicine. Cureus. Web.

Manski, C., F. (2017). Mandating vaccination with unknown indirect effects. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 19(3), 603–619. Web.

(2016). Web.

Wilson, S., F. (2019). Congress.gov. Web.

Individual Rights and Vaccination Policy

Immunization rates are significantly decreasing in many countries, causing an increase in mortality and morbidity from vaccination-controlled illnesses. Giubilini (2020) defines vaccination as an effective, simple, and safe way of protecting individuals against harmful diseases before they experience them. It uses a person’s natural defense to create resistance against a particular infection, therefore, strengthening the body. Immunizations protect against approximately twenty illnesses and save around three million individuals yearly (Giubilini, 2020). However, individuals have distinct views about vaccination, with some accepting it and others refusing.

Every person has a right to refuse vaccination and should not be condemned. Therefore, the school board should listen to the parents’ concerns and determine if their reasons are valid. There are various reasons why guardians reject their children to be vaccinated, including religious beliefs, philosophical or personal perspectives, safety issues, and the desire to get informed by healthcare professionals (Giubilini, 2020). The most significant problem is children’s safety, but this can be reversed by involving healthcare providers or other acquaintances. Caregivers fear that the immunization will do more harm than good, for example, lowering their children’s immunity and exposing them to severe illnesses. These guardians can assume that the injection will not benefit the child if they contact a preventable disease (Giubilini, 2020). Additionally, some believe that natural immunity is better than the vaccinated one. Religious parents might assume that immunization interferes with their faith that God protects people more than the vaccination (Arora et al., 2018). Consequently, people can be unsure about the essentiality of immunization, therefore, require clarification about its pros and cons from healthcare providers.

The school board could decide to educate parents about the vaccination if they raised uninformed concerns. Giubilini (2020) asserts that explaining the importance of immunization to the parents might minimize their fears and they will eventually accept it. Caregivers should be told that diseases such as measles, tetanus, or influenza kill about twenty million individuals annually (Arora et al., 2018). Therefore, immunization protects people and those around them, for example, those with severe diseases (Giubilini, 2020). Vaccination helps the body produce antibodies to fight illnesses after recognizing a germ, such as bacteria or viruses. Individuals should understand that vaccines contain weakened or killed germs and do not cause diseases or put them at risk of complications.

Vaccination helps the immune system fight and destroy a germ in the future before a person becomes unwell. Giubilini (2020) explains that people remain protected against illnesses for years, decades, or the entire life when the body is exposed to one or more vaccine doses. Caregivers should understand that immunization is effective because instead of treating an illness after it happens, they prevent individuals from getting sick in the first instance (Arora et al., 2018). Vaccination minimizes people’s risk of infection and their ability to transmit bacteria or viruses to others (Giubilini, 2020). Therefore, lowering the circulation of pathogens in the community protects individuals who cannot be immunized because of health issues such as the aged or those with allergies.

In conclusion, the school board should engage parents and determine why they might refuse their children’s immunization because every person has the right to decide what they want. Vaccination protects individuals and society against the adverse effects of diseases such as measles. The board can involve healthcare professionals to educate guardians about the benefits and effectiveness of immunization because safety concerns are the primary reasons for refusing vaccination.

References

Arora, K. S., Morris, J., & Jacobs, A. J. (2018). Refusal of vaccination: A test to balance societal and individual interests. The Journal of Clinical Ethics, 29(3), 206. Web.

Giubilini, A. (2020). An argument for compulsory vaccination: The taxation analogy. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 37(3), 446-466. Web.

Question of Mandatory Vaccination

Mandatory vaccination has been a controversial issue for a long time; however, it became especially relevant during a pandemic. The development of new vaccines makes some people happy as they can protect themselves from disease and stop a pandemic and cause others concerns due to possible side effects. For this reason, this paper will examine the ethics of compulsory vaccination and its impact on society.

Mandatory vaccination is a policy adopted by many countries worldwide to protect their populations from infectious diseases. However, any vaccine has a number of side effects that, in rare cases, lead to death or severe health consequences. At the same time, this harm is minor, and the benefits of creating herd immunity and stopping the spread of diseases are much higher (Colgrove, 2019). Hence, the ethical question is whether a state can sacrifice a part of its citizens for the safety of the majority. Another moral issue is the right to refuse vaccination for non-medical reasons since people who voluntarily avoid immunization endanger those who cannot receive it for medical reasons (Savulescu, 2021; Colgrove, 2019). For example, there is a question about the need for mandatory vaccination of children against COVID-19, since they have a low risk of being infected and had severe health outcomes but are at risk of vaccine side effects (Savulescu et al., 2021). However, since children can be carriers of the virus, failure to immunize them endangers other people.

Therefore, while the issue of mandatory immunization raises many ethical questions, the perceived benefits are much greater than the harm. Vaccination can save millions of lives from infectious diseases and their complications and benefit society. At the same time, most people who avoid immunization do not have good reasons for this but are guided by myths and fears. Thus, while compulsory immunization partially restricts people’s freedoms, they are necessary, as are laws or social behavior rules.

References

Colgrove, J. (2019). The Oxford Handbook of Public Health Ethics, 434–447. Web.

Savulescu, J. (2021). Journal of Medical Ethics, 47(2), 78-85. Web.

Savulescu, J., Giubilini, A., & Danchin, M. (2021). The Journal of Pediatrics. Web.