Nanny state taking things a step too far or a policy to applaud?

[TykeMerc]

Australia PM Tony Abbott talks tough on vaccination - BBC News

Having seen a few of my sons schoolmates get severely ill and one of their siblings avoidably brain damaged and blinded my view on vaccination is very clear, but it was even before that.

Until some scare stories popped up 20 years ago most of the childhood diseases were in major decline with very few cases a year in the UK, most of the babies born were fully vaccinated.

I see parents who refuse to vaccinate their children as neglectful and I'd welcome the UK introducing a law like the Aussies are doing.

[NotAllThere]

Seems reasonable. Government (ideally) should be concerned with protecting its citizens. In the case of vaccination, herd immunity is required to protect the vulnerable. Anti-vaxxers undermine that to the detriment of everyone.

I remember during the MMR/Andrew Wakefield storm, I was vilified by some in the PCG forums for suggesting that parents who wouldn't vaccinate their kids were being neglectful. Hopefully they've been lucky enough not to have harmed their kids or anyone else's

[SueEllen]

Just state they can't attend a state nursery/state school if they aren't vaccinated and there isn't a good reason for it.

[Halo Jones]

Just state they can't attend a state nursery/state school if they aren't vaccinated and there isn't a good reason for it.

I agree, but there’s the flaw: define “good reason”: “It’s my choice” is viewed as good reason by some.

[MarillionFan]

Why not make them education or means based. Minimum of one parent with a degree or >£50k per year family income (excluding benefits). Give it a generation or so and you've solved loads of problems.

[NotAllThere]

Just state they can't attend a state nursery/state school if they aren't vaccinated and there isn't a good reason for it.

And then prosecute them for truancy.

[vetran]

I'm all for vaccination but the way they forced the triple vaccination through stank.

[d000hg]

Not providing your child with adequate food, etc, is already something seen as neglect, which can result in the child being removed from you, so refusing to protect your child's health could be argued to come under the same category, if you tried hard enough.

[NotAllThere]

I'm all for vaccination but the way they forced the triple vaccination through stank.

No. It was the right thing to do since:
1) The evidence that there was an issue was entirely lacking
2) The net benefit of the triple vaccine overall is higher than the single vaccines
3) Most parents, if given the choice of triple vaccine or no vaccine, will sensibly adopt the former

Offering the choice would have been the wrong thing to do as it would have increased the risk of children (and people who cannot be immunised) being damaged or dying.

[TykeMerc]

My take on it is the Aussies have exactly the right approach.

Deny allowances and benefits that everyone else gets, it's a clear message, can't be misinterpreted and not too complicated to administer.

Denial of education places and the likes does help to protect other kids from the irresponsible morons who decide to neglect their children's immunities, but it's less likely to impact the parents directly than a prod in the wallet.

My 3 sons were all fully immunised including the MMR triple thing and I'm completely convinced it was the right thing to do.