Disadvantages Of Immunization In Australia

Question 1. The advantages of immunizations are huge, by preventing diseases and death, and safeguarding not only the children but other vulnerable individuals in society who are unable to be vaccinated (Opel & Diekema, 2013). Although the benefits of having healthy children should be reason enough for parents, money is consistently a great incentive to encourage people to do something; and it is obviously working for Australian citizens seeing that their country’s immunization rates are so high. Of course Australia’s current system seems like a valid immunization program, but parents will certainly have mixed feelings about it (Davey, 2015). Correspondingly, evidence shows that some parents may agree to follow the “No Jab, No Pay” policy

Also, it inadvertently alleviates stress from parents knowing that their children will still be allowed to attend school despite not being up to date on their vaccinations when school starts. Additionally, it allows parents to complete their children’s vaccination schedule with some flexibility and convenience. The common idiom, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, is suitable when reviewing the current Australian approach; the government arguably generates better immunization rates than countries that follow the school enrollment approach, therefore it seems unnecessary to attempt improving it. Not to mention, it is an incisive way to benefit the low-income families; the children stay healthy and their parents profit from the family assistance payments. No only this, but the immunization programs are trying to discourage parents from “taking over the doctoring role of doctors” when they are not medically qualified, based on facts they read about vaccines through not credible, and unreliable sources, such as celebrities and other social media (Sorell, 2004,

The plan to remove personal belief exemptions from immunization programs draws in both esteem and animosity (Dare, 1998). Normally I would agree with not granting personal belief exemptions, however, Australia already has a very high immunization rate that incorporating this into their current policy appears extreme. Similarly, the Australian government must realize that there will never be a 100% immunization rate, even if they remove personal belief exemptions from their policy. Not to mention, with there already seemingly strict immunization program, by increasing government control, it may actually increase vaccine objections in society (Opel &Diekema, 2013). At the present time for Australia, removing personal belief exemptions does not seem like the right strategy to use to increase vaccine rates. Additionally, it could generate an overpowering sense of intimidation and intrusion for parents in relation to their parental judgments (Opel & Diekema, 2013). Instead, the government should be looking at why parents are choosing to opt-out rather than removing their ability to opt-out (Opel & Diekema, 2013). Furthermore, the Australian government should look at increasing difficulty of the exemption process rather than eliminating it altogether (Opel & Diekema, 2013). Even more, with their high immunization rate, herd immunity is already achieved even with personal belief exemptions being allowed. Ultimately, it is not worth jeopardizing the safety of children in