Vaccination is a human rights issue.

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Dan

2013-05-31 06:59:46 UTC

http://skep.li/15eHxlc

Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 11:26PM Dan Buzzard

On Tuesday the Australian Vaccination Network sent out an email full of
their usual rubbish. Except there was one thing that caught my eye.
About one third of the way down is the subtitle "Civil Liberties
Organisation approves of Discrimination!" what I found was very amusing.
It would appear that a member of the AVN has contacted Civil Liberties
Australia regarding their stance on vaccination.

The CLA has responded:

Dear DM

We support vaccination, as it is a right of the child.

Note, the child. The child has a separate right from that of the parent.

Parents can believe anything they like, but we believe children have the
right to the best chance at health.

This is a formal right under international agreement. the Convention on
the Right of the Child.

You can make any choice you like...that's your right. You can insist on
your right to say 'no' as a new parent, but it could be your child who
suffers the consequences.

Or another child: see the example in our policy document, or see the
vision of the baby whooping in Sunday night's documentary on SBS
http://www.sbs.com.au under Video Highlights, "Jabbed: Love, Fear and
Vaccines" (you only need to watch a few minutes, the child comes at the
start of the program). The child was whooping because an unvaccinated
children had passed on the disease to the baby before the baby was old
enough to be vaccinated.

If you choose to not vaccinate your children, we believe you are taking
away their right to their best chance at health.

Your choice.

FROM OUR POLICY DOCUMENT:

The child has a right to health, independent of the right of a parent to
adopt measures for her or his child that accord with the parent's view

CLA believes that a child has a right to immediate vaccination in the
face of an imminent and preventable illness (for example, Hep B for
children born to mothers who have the disease) and has a right to a
'best chance' at life, which would support the well-tested schedule of
childhood vaccinations.

Parents have a responsibility to act in the 'best interests' of the
child (this is a formal responsibility on a parent under the Convention
on Rights of the Child).

CLA's position allows children (and their parents) to make their own
decision on some types of vaccines, especially those that come later in
life, such as the HPV[1] vaccine (which isn't life saving in the same
way Hep B, tetanus or whooping cough vaccines can be). It also allows
parents a way to opt-out of 'new' and less-tested vaccines such as
seasonal influenza.

Cheers,

Bill Rowlings

-Civil Liberties Australia

The idea that an anti-vaxxer would contact a human rights organisation
is just beyond laughable. People who don't vaccinate are contributing to
a lower heard immunity and placing other members of the community at
risk. Vaccination is a human rights issue and should be mandatory, with
the only exception being medical reasons. Even adults should be required
to be vaccinated if they wish to take part in society.

There is no "right" to lower heard immunity put others at risk of
potentially fatal diseases for the same reason there is no "right" to
drink and drive.

John H. Gohde

2013-05-31 09:14:41 UTC