Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 134 posts

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#21

Post by [deleted] »

bronson wrote: post #14
pzxc wrote: post #11

Some people view their right to not vaccinate, not circumcise, have a home birth of their son and then home-school him, to be an essential religious freedom protected by the first amendment, no different than their right to be a conscientious objector of military conscription. This is a far more complex issue than it appears. Don't dismiss it derisively, as if only an idiot could disagree with you. (Not speaking to a…

Your decisions on circumcision and home birth do not affect my infant child's ability to live. Your decision on vaccination does.

[deleted]

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#22

Post by Gustomaximus »

joezydeco wrote: post #5

New York has set such a policy in place and it's been upheld through multiple trials and appeals. Perhaps once it's settled in the higher courts it will become standard policy in a lot of other places. Once can hope. http://jurist.org/paperchase/2015/01/federal-appeals-court-u...

This policy is in Australia also. They have done case studies showing the benefits: http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishi...

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#23

Post by Crito »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #6
DanBC wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mockery and ridicule do not change people's minds. People who chose not to vaccinate their children only retreat further from vaccination if you use mockery or ridicule. If your aim is to protect children by increasing the numbers of vaccinated children it's important not to use mockery or ridicule. Those are the wrong tools.

> If your aim is to protect children by increasing the numbers of vaccinated children it's important not to use mockery or ridicule. Those are the wrong tools. When education fails, when facts fail, when logic and reason fail, you're left with mockery and/or ridicule.

Or force.

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#24

Post by pbreit »

symkat wrote: post #9
joezydeco wrote: post #5

New York has set such a policy in place and it's been upheld through multiple trials and appeals. Perhaps once it's settled in the higher courts it will become standard policy in a lot of other places. Once can hope. http://jurist.org/paperchase/2015/01/federal-appeals-court-u...

It seems to me like New York's current law is the same as California. From the article you linked: The state law provides two exemptions from the mandate, ... the second for "children whose parent, parents, or guardian hold genuine and sincere religious beliefs which are contrary to the practices herein required. The NPR article seems to discuss a father specifically attacking the personal belief exemption in Califor…

I highly doubt people in Marin are doing it on religious grounds.

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#25

Post by mayneack »

DanBC wrote: post #4
pstuart wrote: post #2

Mockery and ridicule are powerful tools. This is a good application for them.

Mockery and ridicule do not change people's minds. People who chose not to vaccinate their children only retreat further from vaccination if you use mockery or ridicule. If your aim is to protect children by increasing the numbers of vaccinated children it's important not to use mockery or ridicule. Those are the wrong tools.

I'm curious what the basis is for your statement? Is mockery the best method for changing peoples' behavior here? Probably not, but I'm not convinced that it's counter productive like you assert.

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#26

Post by anathebealo »

pzxc wrote: post #11

Some people view their right to not vaccinate, not circumcise, have a home birth of their son and then home-school him, to be an essential religious freedom protected by the first amendment, no different than their right to be a conscientious objector of military conscription. This is a far more complex issue than it appears. Don't dismiss it derisively, as if only an idiot could disagree with you. (Not speaking to a…

While I understand how most of the things you listed are covered under religious freedoms, I cannot comprehend how not vaccinating a child counts towards that. Not being vaccinated puts your child in direct danger of contracting a disease and further spreading it to others. First amendment rights are valid unless you are putting others in harm's way.

I'm from New Hampshire and we are, by law, required to have vaccines up to date before attending the first day of school (http://www.procon.org/sourcefiles/New-Hampshire-vax-req.pdf). I've never understood why all states don't require this.

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#27

Post by smuss77 »

If it was my son and he couldn't be vaccinated for a few months I'd simply hold him out of school until the vaccinations could be administered. I feel for the child and his family, it's a horrible thing that happened to them, but talk about solving a simple problem with an activist response. This is how we end up with a ridiculous number of laws and regulations. If we should legislate that every kid in a public school is vaccinated, why would we stop there? Why not legislate every kid that enters a public library be vaccinated? Why not any public place?

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#28

Post by jobposter1234 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #6
DanBC wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mockery and ridicule do not change people's minds. People who chose not to vaccinate their children only retreat further from vaccination if you use mockery or ridicule. If your aim is to protect children by increasing the numbers of vaccinated children it's important not to use mockery or ridicule. Those are the wrong tools.

> If your aim is to protect children by increasing the numbers of vaccinated children it's important not to use mockery or ridicule. Those are the wrong tools. When education fails, when facts fail, when logic and reason fail, you're left with mockery and/or ridicule.

I understand the urge, believe me. But now I'm trying to be a less sarcastic person, because the way I see it, mockery / ridicule is tantamount to giving up.

Totally cool with it. It's fun, and gives you a smug feeling that is unfortunately also fun. But I don't let myself think I'm doing anything other than throwing in the towel in trying to help this other inhabitant of our rock.

Once I frame it that way to myself, I find myself either continuing to try or completely ignoring the other person.

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#29

Post by [deleted] »

Crito wrote: post #23
toomuchtodo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your aim is to protect children by increasing the numbers of vaccinated children it's important not to use mockery or ridicule. Those are the wrong tools. When education fails, when facts fail, when logic and reason fail, you're left with mockery and/or ridicule.

Or force.

[deleted]

Re: To Protect His Son, a Father Asks School to Bar Unvaccinated Children

#30

Post by pstuart »

mayneack wrote: post #25
DanBC wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mockery and ridicule do not change people's minds. People who chose not to vaccinate their children only retreat further from vaccination if you use mockery or ridicule. If your aim is to protect children by increasing the numbers of vaccinated children it's important not to use mockery or ridicule. Those are the wrong tools.

I'm curious what the basis is for your statement? Is mockery the best method for changing peoples' behavior here? Probably not, but I'm not convinced that it's counter productive like you assert.

I prefer facts and reason. When those don't work, what's left that doesn't involve force?
Post reply on HN