Introduction
Childhood vaccination entails an equilibrium between parents’ independence in determining whether to vaccinate their kids and the importance of public healthcare in authorizing immunization. Following the growing industrialization and globalization in nations outbreak of diseases which spread to other states globally, comprising the United States, there has been developing attention to the United States childhood vaccination exercise. Ethical issues concerning pediatric immunization span numerous public healthcare fields, such as those of clinicians, medical experts, and policymakers (Benecke & DeYoung, 2019). Current research linked to the spread of the various pandemics within America and various policy implementors has advocated for the end of parent’s involvement in the process, with the nation advocating for the uptake of immunization amongst children. Several parents have expressed their views concerning their involvement in the vaccination of their children, and most have articulated that they should decide for their infants (Benecke & DeYoung, 2019). Therefore, in the light of the current debates and developments, this paper intends to express an opposing opinion to the parents’ involvement in decision-making on the vaccination of their kids.
Vaccines Behaviors and Attitudes
Despite the growing comprehension and the proposition regarding parents’ involvement in childhood immunization, developed economies, such as America are witnessing resistance from parents. These parents believe that the decision should be voluntary for every individual including the children. Even though the spread of pro-vaccine has become common through social channels, both in person and online, a growing faction of investigation further concludes that the process should be voluntary amongst children (Patty et al., 2017). Moreover, the parents resist the idea of their involvement in the vaccination of their children since they assume that immunization will significantly impact their kids’ health. They further believe that democratic parenting entails allowing the children to make their decisions concerning the vaccination procedure. Furthermore, the denial of childhood immunization is influenced by issues concerning vaccine constituents, the severity of the diseases, low perceived likelihood, and a credulous connection with a traditional healer who doubts the effectiveness and safety of the inoculation process (Patty et al., 2017). Therefore, the opposition to vaccination of children entails a well-regarded decision centered on the benefits and the threats of jab, the infant’s susceptibility to the virus, and the acceptance of responsibility for the decision.
Determinants of Vaccine Refusal
Considering that most children’s immune system is not adequately developed to receive vaccinations, it is therefore inappropriate for parents to decide on inoculating their kids without further consultations. For instance, some parents believe that the immune system of their children develops owing to their mother and it is not ethical to give them substances that can alter their immune system (Hoogink et al., 2020). Similarly, since the infection rate of the virus is low in children, they should not be vaccinated due to their parent’s choices since the infants rarely participated in social events during the pandemic period. Vaccine-preventable diseases are usually not severe and can be easily treated, thus immunization decisions should be restricted among parents.
In addition, researchers and medical experts believe children are not actively involved in social activities but believed that the persons in the social environment influence parental choice. Consequently, most parents are inclined to the assumption that they can decide to vaccinate their children equally with their counterparts. This has since instigated forced vaccination against children despite the international healthcare acts providing that all patients should be liable to accept or refuse treatment regardless of their age (Hoogink et al., 2020). Also, considering the efficacy of vaccines, parents should not independently decide to inoculate their children. Some disease agents can mutate, whereas some diseases are obsolete, hence protection from vaccines is not usually 100 percent guaranteed (Hoogink et al., 2020). Simultaneously, some vaccines only function temporarily but have adverse side effects. Finally, since a healthy lifestyle enhances children’s wellbeing, the risk of exposure to infectious diseases is normally reduced. The parents should instead rely on good nutrition that boosts their kid’s immune systems and improves their health outcomes in the case of future infections. Therefore, the parents should be restricted from independently deciding to take their children for vaccination since the act further violates human rights laws and the state freedom acts.
Conclusion
This essay has presented an in-depth understanding of the issue of vaccination and opposes the idea that children do not need to be vaccinated and it should be upon their parents to make the decision. Parents require verifiable insight concerning the impacts of inoculation on the development of their kid’s immune systems and how they can ensure their children are protected from vaccine-preventable illnesses. Also, the parents should learn the risks linked to forceful vaccination of children since some infants tend to experience various side effects from vaccines. At the same time, nurses and other medical experts should be involved in the decision-making process to ensure the children make the appropriate choices regarding vaccination. The debate on vaccination decisions is, therefore, a vital issue and should involve all the relevant stakeholders, including children.
References
Benecke, O., & DeYoung, S. E. (2019). Anti-vaccine decision-making and measles resurgence in the United States. Global Pediatric Health, 6, 1-15. Web.
Hoogink, J., Verelst, F., Kessels, R., Van Hoek, A. J., Timen, A., Willem, L., Beutels, P., Wallinga, J., & De Wit, G. A. (2020). Preferential differences in vaccination decision-making for oneself or one’s child in The Netherlands: A discrete choice experiment. BMC Public Health, 20, 1–14.
Patty, N. J., Van Dijk, H. M., Wallenburg, I., Bal, R., Helmerhorst, T. J., Van Exel, J., & Cramm, J. M. (2017). To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? Perspectives on HPV vaccination among girls, boys, and parents in the Netherlands: a Q-methodological study. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 1–12. Web.