The
This is a great example of why the government should not be given a virtual monopoly on education. No school system can be one size fits all- least of all a government run school system. But never mind the inability of public schools to adequately educate their students; trumping the decisions made by parents that affect a child’s health goes way beyond that. Let me be clear- I am someone who likes to be vaccinated. I even received my flu shot a few weeks ago. However, the PG school system should not be arrogant enough to force any student to get a vaccination over the direction of that student’s parents. No one has more of an interest in the health of their child than the parents.
I get a kick out of the fact that PG is willing to grant an exemption for religious reasons. If I, as a parent, believes that spirits who live outside of our world of space and time do not want my child to get vaccinated, that is a valid reason. If I have a holistic approach to my child’s health that does not involve vaccinations, I am carted off to jail. What a joke.
10 comments:
I don't understand the religious exemption. Are those students still allowed to attend class? A lot of those vaccinations are against highly contagious diseases. Does believing in God mean that these kids are less of a danger to the other students?
Who defines the religions that are exempt?
FM,
Sorry, but I'm repeating "choose civility" to myself to keep from really going off.
Please consider this as less an affront to your worldview about the role of government and more about keeping kids healthy. A sad but important role of school systems is to provide that safety-net for things that parents SHOULD do for their childrens' health.
"No one has more of an interest in the health of their child than the parents."
That's a nice sentiment, but it's naive. Don't know about parental/guardian negligence? I'd be happy to introduce you to some of the folks who pick up the pieces day in and day out.
Granted, not all of these Prince George's parents are negligent. Plenty are likely to be folks whose english is limited (or non-existent) so there's a language barrier. There are tons of other reasons as well. Some valid, some not.
Consider holding your normal reactions in check and dig a little deeper on this topic and learn just WHY this is being pushed so hard.
Want to discuss this some more? I'm game...
John
John, please learn the fundamental difference between parental negligence and a parents wish not to have their child vaccinated. The distinction is crucial.
As always, both sides feel they are right.
Of the total, 2300, with no vaccinations (before the notice of fines or jail), 1200 were vaccinated after the "threat".
Looks like, and I say 'looks like" more than half were procastinating.
The school system just may be on to something here.
To these parents we could ask "Do you care less about your children then the school system does"?
We are so fast with verbal abuse, it's always the other guy.
It can't be the parents so it must be the school system that is wrong - right?
FM: Two thumbs up on the distinction that evolved humans can determine between black, white, and gray.
Of course there are parents who are neglectful and will endanger all our children. But there are also children whose systems cannot tolerate these vaccines.
My children borderline-tolerated the vaccines but I kept the injections to a minimum and now that we are finding out they actually included unnecessaryily toxic heavy metals it's more than ever a parent's right to look into the situation.
FM and Anon6:51,
Those who apply and receive medical exemptions aren't part of the group that's being hounded. I can't receive immunizations and my parents with my school, and later myself with my empoyers, had to go through the exemption process. Same thing with those that seek religious or even other exemptions. Folks who object go through the process. They're not part of the group that's being reported on.
Just like with the DC school system immunization issue some years back (same ordeal) - the big problem wasn't with parents who didn't WANT immunizations, but those who didn't do it for other reasons (like procrastination, as Jim divined).
And you're right FM, there IS a crucial difference between a parent who's negligent (or something akin to it) and a parent who doesn't want their child to be vaccinated. However the problem that Prince George's faces is NOT a gigantic number of folks who are consciously anti-immunization: their problems stem from the parents who don't sign the consent form OR object. The ones who are simply absent.
John, you are missing the point. If a parent does not have a medical or religious exemption, and that parent refuses to sign the consent form, their child is not allowed to attend school. I as read the article, there is no form to return if you refuse vaccinations for your child and have no spirit-based or medical reason not to receive a shot. If you don’t get your kid vaccinated, your kid stays home.
You are assuming that those who have not signed the consent form or received an exemption are simply procrastinators. There is no evidence to suggest that. Even if that were the case, threatening those parents with jail time is beyond ridiculous.
I am glad you were able to maintain your civility.
FM,
Sorry - but I am not missing the point. A big problem here is that you're missing information because the article you read didn't go into enough detail.
I certainly AM assuming that they're procrastinators, negligent or don't understand the language because that's what happens EVERY time when the issue of compliance with school immunizations come up. Seek out someone - anyone - who works in community health. Heck, just talk to a school nurse or a teacher in a K-5 school. They'll tell you more about the difficulties in simply getting parents to focus/read these types of forms.
And threatening them with jail time or barring the kids from the classroom ISN'T ridiculous. It's necessary to a successful public health program. It's how we've minimized the spread of some of the nastiest infectious diseases that are out there.
“I certainly AM assuming that they're procrastinators, negligent or don't understand the language because that's what happens EVERY time when the issue of compliance with school immunizations come up.”
I think the subjectivity of the above statement speaks for itself.
FM,
My statements ARE subjective, but they're also drawn from a certain amount of experience with the topic, so I feel comfortable putting them out there.
As highly as I think of most journalists (I'm married to one), the constraints of their media mean that a certain amount of context gets left out.
I hope that in the midst of my pounding away at the keyboard, SOME context or potentially useful perspective came through. I don't know that it did, but hey - tilting at windmills is good exercise for me :)
Post a Comment