How say you?
Such a nation has bigger problems than vaccines.
In California the penalty for not vaccinating is not being able to enroll a child in school where he or she could be a danger to those who can’t be vaccinated due to valid medical conditions.
A good question. How much should a well intended individual take it upon themselves to overrule parents decisions about the care of their child? Does the principle change dependent upon if we happen to agree or disagree with the parenting choice? A decision we like should be respected but we do not shouldn’t be? What is the berth for parents’ decisions to be respected even if you disagree? How much does an outside individual have a right to impose their values into that process and is that other than the state?
I’m not so sure that the tutor had the ethical right to impose his individual and personal values and beliefs about the value and risks of maths education and to ignore the parents wishes.
It is already noted that we *are *such as country for some lines that get crossed, when it is clear that certain decisions are against the child’s best interest or is a clear threat to community welfare. Not the doctor alone but with the child protective services and the courts bought in. This even applies to vaccination in certain cases. As has been noted in most circumstances herd immunity results in little significant risk to one child who has not gotten immunized, (and the op raised the stakes beyond that even with its hypothetical) but say the context was a dirty puncture wound and the risk of tetanus? Then it might be justified.
Just to be clear, you’re original question was “Do doctors respect parent’s wishes when treating children?” And you’re satisfied that the answer is “Yes”?
Then we’re done here?
Have you considered learning to not misread?
Have you considered answering the question as to what “disrespecting the parents” means in your fantasy scenario where all the lawyers are on strike?
I don’t have a problem with the siblings of a child who died as a result of a vaccination not getting vaccinated. What does that come out to, about a dozen children a year? Even that many?
If the OP is saying that that would be the only exemption-death of an immediate family member tied directly to the vaccine-then I would have no problem with that exemption.
Well, Quartz, is this the only exemption you support?
Well given that my impression is that none of us are very clear what you were asking, and that given you found my answer satisfactory, which basically was that yes, we respect parents wishes to not do something (later modified for accuracy, barring extreme cases in which child protective services and the courts need to be brought in), have you considered clarifying what you are then actually meaning to ask and curious about?
Much much less. A case report of someone who fainted after a vaccine, hit his head, and died from the head injury. Two deaths over nine years from Guillian-Barre Syndrome that might have been attributable to influenza vaccination (they occurred within six weeks of vaccination so were felt as possibly causally related). Similarly two cases of deaths from intussusception that were timed such that causation was considered possible over six years. Five cases of fatal anaphylactic reactions over ten years. And a handful of cases over the years in which the individual was immunocompromised and had a reaction to a live vaccine (some in which the immunocompromise was not identified).
None of those are familial risks nor medical contraindication for a sibling being immunized. Of course a parent’s fear is however understandable.
Does my respecting the fear and their wish mean that I should sign a form stating that there is a medical reason for the child to not be vaccinated when there in fact is not?
Perhaps people should try reading the question and answering it directly, instead of assuming a layer of anti-vax lies?
We need to come up with a name for the type of thread that starts out with a prosaic question, only to have the OP follow up with a bunch of drive-by posts.
Perhaps the question isn’t as clear as the OP thinks, and perhaps questions asked because of that problem should be addressed.
I am not assuming anything. I literally don’t know if you are asking:
-
Is it appropriate for a doctor to secretly vaccinate a child without the parent’s knowledge or consent in light of this tragedy?
-
Is it appropriate for a doctor to ask a family to leave his practice if they won’t vaccinate, in light of this tragedy?
-
Is it appropriate for a doctor to make a passionate and well-supported argument in favor of vaccination to this family at every visit, in light of this tragedy?
-
Is it appropriate for the doctor to mildly suggest vaccination to this family at each visit, in light of the this tragedy?
Each of those 4 scenarios could be considered “disrespectful” to a grieving family. I have different answers to each. Could you PLEASE tell me which of them you meant when you used the word “disrespectful”?
The only thing I have to go on is the words you’ve typed in here. As several of us have pointed out, without definitions it’s pretty hard to answer completely. You posted in Great Debates, not IMHO or GQ, so I assume there’s a debate you wish to have. If so, you’ll need to clarify your intent.
My WAG is that this line " But no vaccine is perfect…" means you are a anti-vaxxer.
The answer has been given. The doctor can not give the shot without the parents permission.
Now, if you want a deeper answer- the question is why a harmless vaccine killed a young healthy girl. Was is a genetic issue, did that young girl carry some one in a million gene? What?
There’s no debate here.
That is not true.
Why did that child have such a reaction?
Yes, I agree, this is a anti-vaxxer type of conundrum.
It’s important for physicians to elicit good medical histories in order to make evidence-based recommendations for or against vaccination. A previous death in the family may make it hard to alleviate parental concern*, but in the overwhelming majority of cases, deaths are not caused by vaccination but are due to pre-existing conditions or are coincidental.
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS, co-administered by the CDC and FDA), which is a voluntary system to which anyone can contribute (including health care providers, attorneys and others), contains several thousand reports of deaths supposedly occurring around the time of vaccination.** Analysis has shown that these deaths typically have no relation to immunization.
“In our VAERS review, we did not detect any concerning patterns that would suggest causal relationships between vaccination and deaths. With rare exceptions (eg, anaphylaxis), the evidence from multiple VAERS reviews in combination with findings from (Institute of Medicine) reviews and a VSD study using electronic health record databases do not suggest a causal relationship or increased risk of death following vaccination.”
*I don’t envy the physician trying to explain to parents of an infant that died of SIDS a couple of weeks after vaccination that no, the vaccine(s) did not cause the baby’s death and that they should have their next child protected by vaccination.
**a classic in this genre is the teenaged girl who received a human papillomavirus vaccine and some days later fell down a well and died, with her case reported to VAERS. HPV vaccination seems to be a lightning rod for similarly bogus complaints about vaccine-linked injury and death.
Simple physical medical contraindication may not exist, but the well being and mental health of the family could be a medical consideration as well. Or just on the socio-political level, this handful of exceptions is not going to lead to an epidemic, at worst it would only affect that small number of excepted children since everyone else is getting vaccinated.
None of those are in my OP. You are reading into my OP stuff that isn’t there. Apply Occam’s Razor. Read it literally, then answer.
It cannot be done unless you tell us what you mean by “respect”, and what you mean by “disrespect”. How can you not understand the problem here?
If the doctor does not “respect” the parent’ wishes, what exactly is he doing to not respect those wishes?