Hall 1 Darian Hall Professor Dursema English 1010 1 Aug.

2013 Self-Assessment In this paper I chose to explore the topic of parents having the right to refuse vaccinations for their children and the controversy they face from those that feel adamant about vaccines being mandated by the government. I chose this topic because its an issue that is brought up in current articles and media and because I personally have been weighing the pros and cons of vaccines and their effects. As a mother of two small children I feel the need to have adequate information before taking a risk that could potentially harm them. I began researching by looking up actual vaccine statistics which I found helpful but less important to the overall topic of my paper. It was a struggle for me to focus less on what vaccines are required and their potential side effects and more on whether or not parents have the right to decide what care is provided to their children. It was also a struggle to remove my personal emotions and feelings about the topic while writing. As much as I wanted to state that I believe in a parents right to choose it was hard for me to not take a stand on one specific side throughout. I found it helpful to redirect my thinking while writing. For example while writing, researching and reading about the harm that comes to children from not being vaccinated my writing became geared towards explaining why it was important to have children vaccinated.

Hall 2 When re-reading my work I would have to redirect and question whether that was supporting my stand on parents right to choose whether it was accepted by the public or not. I also struggled knowing where or how to begin my paper. I didnt want to convey too much of my personal feelings about the topic so was not sure if using logos or adding a value of pathos would be best to display both sides of the argument. I believe that some of the statements I made appeal to pathos but tried to make sure that the emotion could be felt no matter which side the reader was leaning towards. After writing my paper and looking at some of the research it gave me a more personal confidence in making a decision myself. I believe strongly that a parent has the best interest of their children at heart and whether I agree with decisions made or not I can at least respect that they have chosen what they believe is the most beneficial to their family.

Hall 3 Darian Hall Professor Dursema English 1010 30 July 2013 VACCINES: Helpful or harmful, can you decide? A little girl is held by her mother in the emergency room coughing and wheezing so hard that she can barely catch her breath. Her face is pale, her lips are blue, and she doesnt look to have even enough energy to hold her own head. As a part of her religion this mother believed that the risk of contracting a disease through a vaccination would be a sin and so she chose not to have it done for her daughter. Did this little girl contract this virus from not having her vaccinations? On the other hand your neighbors son had every required vaccination on schedule according to state recommendations and regulations. He was healthy and vibrant until his last round of vaccines at his five year check-up. Shortly after his parents noticed some of his behaviors changing as he regressed and stopped speaking all together displaying signs and symptoms of autism. These situations have no clear answers and there is not enough sufficient research to fully support either theory. The real question is whether or not parents should have the right to decline vaccinations for their children or should the government continue to have the ability to regulate what vaccines are required. As cofounders of the Center for Personal Rights Louise Kuo Habakus and Mary Holland state that, all fifty states mandate from thirty to forty-five doses of

Hall 4 about a dozen different vaccines for admission to day care and school (1). This leaves parents with little choice concerning vaccinations if they want their children to participate in public education. In Immunizations: A Parents Choice, Christopher Klicka points out that there have been a few exceptions made to required vaccines for conscientious, philosophical and religious beliefs but those have only been permitted in 48 out of the 50 states. The purpose of this paper is to explore the opinions of both those who feel strongly about immunizations being required for public health and safety and those that feel parents should maintain the right to make, what they feel, are the best decisions regarding their childrens wellbeing. After evaluating both sides it should be argued that regardless of personal and emotional feelings regarding choices of parents in favor of or opposed to vaccinations what should be respected is the parents right to make the decision. A parents number one concern for their children is their overall health and safety. When contemplating the decision of whether or not to vaccinate children the first thing to think about is if the vaccine has the potential to harm or even kill their children. Klicka informs his reader that, every year the Food and Drug Administration receives 12,000-14,000 reports to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) of hospitalizations, injuries and deaths following vaccination. Because of these unfortunate cases The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has been established to financially compensate families that have experienced injuries or death in response to receiving vaccines (Klicka). A program like this gives good reason for any parent to feel uneasy about and question the overall safety and potential side effects of medications they are being required to have administered to their children. However, a lot of parents are not asking the questions some feel they should be responsible to ask and instead they are walking into doctors offices uneducated about the subject

Hall 5 accepting and trusting their care provider to lead them in the right direction. In Should Parents Be Forced to Vaccinate Their Children, Deidre Imus blames the media for misinforming the general public and using intimidation tactics to get parents to vaccinate. Parents could face having their children expelled from their schools, monetary fines, and have even be threatened with involving child protection agencies as a way to coerce them into vaccinating their children. In Vaccine Epidemic, Habakus and Holland respond to questions of vaccines benefiting the overall health of society by responding with, look at the health of children in the United States today. One in six has a learning disability; one in nine has asthma; one in twelve has ADD; one in one hundred ten has autism (282). It brings to light that while vaccines may be helping to prevent disease outbreaks they may not be as beneficial to our overall health as we are led to believe and reinforcing parents concerns about whether or not to vaccinate. They suggest that the choice of whether or not to vaccinate should be based on what the childs parents and healthcare practitioner find most beneficial after weighing the risks versus the benefits and state that, government coerces no other one-size-fits-all medical program; its justification for this one is unconvincing (7). The topic of vaccines and whether or not to administer them does not seem to have a grey area. It is a subject people argue adamantly about and as an author for The New York Times, Jennifer Steinhauer states that, children who are not vaccinated are unnecessarily susceptible to serious illnesses, they say, but also present a danger to children who have had their shots. She suggests that parents are abusing the system and taking advantage of certain vaccine exemptions opting out of vaccines for personal beliefs claiming them to be for medical or religious purposes. Some of these parents even go to great lengths to expose their children to others with diseases believing that this will help them to naturally build immunities and this can be a dangerous

Hall 6 decision to those not vaccinated because it is usually based on no scientific evidence (Steinhauer). Vaccine advocates who are in favor of government regulation of vaccines also place blame on the media for implementing fear by blaming vaccines for neurological disorders, asthma, autism, and more. Parents are choosing to not vaccinate their children based on the fact that some of the things their children are being vaccinated for havent been issues or there has not been an outbreak of a certain disease for many years. These advocates are accusing parents of not being properly educated on the issue and are not stopping to question the why behind there not being any recent outbreaks or giving credit to the vaccines for prevention. Dr. Mark Sawyer who is a pediatrician and infectious disease specialist stated the issue with this theory is that, most of these parents have never seen measles, and dont realize it could be a bad disease so they turn their concerns to unfounded risks. They do not perceive risk of the disease but perceive risk of the vaccine (Steinhauer). Evidence shows that clusters of unvaccinated people have the ability to spread disease to a much larger group of people including those that have been vaccinated (Steinhauer). As an example Steinhauer states, Here in California, six pertussis outbreaks infected 24 people in 2007; only 2 of 24 were documented as having been appropriately immunized. As author of Deadly Choices, Paul Offit believes that we are at a critical point and the time to take a stand is now. He suggests that parents are focusing too much on the fear of injecting vaccines and not enough on the diseases that they have been preventing (191). Some doctors feel so strongly about providing vaccines to children that they will refuse to treat them at all. Offit suggests that the problem with this approach is doctors are alienating the parents and withdrawing healthcare professionals ability to try and further educate parents in their decision,

Hall 7 leaving unvaccinated children as well as those around them at risk for contracting diseases. He acknowledges the tough position healthcare professionals are finding themselves in. If they choose not to treat children that have not been vaccinated then they are taking a stand sending a message of disapproval. However if they continue to treat children who have not been vaccinated they may fear that it shows parents acceptance of their choice (197). The debate on whether or not parents should have the right to choose vaccinations or not can be endless but it should be argued that unless the government is willing to take responsibility for a child and the rare injury or illness they may contract from a vaccine then they should not have the power to mandate them since it is the parents that will live with the effects of every decision they make for their children forever. There is a need to protect public health and safety especially for children that are left vulnerable and unable to speak for themselves but perhaps we should be focusing on an issue that could promote public health without revoking parental rights. Christopher Klicka states, the most effective deterrent to these infectious diseases are the enactment and enforcement of public sanitation laws. Parents should not be blamed for questioning the controversy surrounding vaccines as they are just trying to protect their children from the potentially harmful effects that have been reported and as Klicka also said, it is long recognized that, as a general principle, parents act in the best interests of their children and, as a result, make the best decisions for their children. Whether or not people agree with a decision shouldnt matter as much as a parents right to make the decision should be respected.

Hall 8

Works Cited Habakus, Louise Kuo, and Mary Holland. Vaccine Epidemic. New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2011. Print. As cofounders of the Center for Personal Rights Louise Kuo Habakus and Mary Holland are advocates for parents rights in the debate of whether or not to vaccinate your children. This will provide my paper with information on why it is important to leave the choice to the parents as well as provide logos concerning actual vaccine information. Imus, Deirdre. Should Parents Be Forced to Vaccinate Their Children? Alternet.org. AlterNet, 3 June 2008. Web. 21 July 2013. Deirdre Imus is the Founder and President of the Deirdre Imus Environmental Center for Pediatric Oncology. In this article she addresses the concerns parents are experiencing when faced with the decision of vaccinations. She supports parents right to choose the risks they take concerning their children and chastises articles, including pieces from Time magazine and the New York Post, suggesting that they are abusing pathos and using scare tactics of horrible diseases to alter beliefs. This article will serve purpose in my paper by evaluating the effect that media has on manipulating peoples emotions causing them to act or not act and to address the governments regulations as well as their lack of responsibility for the outcome. Klicka, Christopher. Immunizations: A Parents Choice. HSLDA.org.

Hall 9 HSLDA, 13 Sep. 2007. Web. 21 July 2013. Serving as Senior Counsel of the Home School Legal Defense Association with over 15 years of experience Christopher Klicka was an active lobbyist advocating for parents and childrens rights. In this article he addresses key questions concerning vaccines including potential harmful effects of vaccines, religious concerns about vaccinating, as well as fundamental rights parents have to decide. As an advocate for parental rights he stands firm that parents should have the right to choose what actions to take when concerning the wellbeing of their children and not be forced into action by government mandates. Offit, Paul A. Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All. Philadelphia: Basic Books, 2011. Print. Paul Offit works as the Director of the Vaccine Education Center and is Chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases. In this book he argues that parents are so focused on media driven and uneducated fears dealing with vaccines that they are not vaccinating their children therefore hindering them more by leaving them exposed to potential outbreaks. He gives insight to healthcare professionals opinions on the topic and proposes solutions to this problem. This book benefits my paper by giving me insight into the opinions of some who are in favor of vaccine regulations and the problems they feel strongly about when it comes to opting out of vaccines. Steinhauer, Jennifer. Public Health Risk Seen as Parents Reject Vaccines. Nytimes.com. The New York Times, 21 Mar. 2008. Web. 28 July 2013.

Hall 10 This article provides more information from someone who is also in favor of regulated vaccines. Steinhauer provides many statistics as well as statements from healthcare professionals dealing with vaccine information. This article will help to establish some peoples personal feelings on vaccines as well as establish potentials of what could happen with more people choosing not to vaccinate.