Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical dilemmas in vaccinations
Autonomy in medicine
Ethical dilemmas in vaccinations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical dilemmas in vaccinations
Autonomy in medicine
Ethical dilemmas in vaccinations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Simon's argument is well-supported and he provides compelling examples of how Aristotle's philosophy can be applied to the issue of vaccines. One potential weakness of Simon's article is that it may be difficult for readers who are not familiar with Aristotle's philosophy to fully understand his argument. Additionally, Simon's article focuses primarily on the ethical issues at stake in the anti-vaccine movement, and does not provide as much information about the scientific evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of vaccines. While Simon's argument is compelling, it may be less persuasive to readers who are skeptical of vaccines due to misinformation or conspiracy theories. Simon uses Aristotle's philosophy to argue that the anti-vaccine movement is motivated by a flawed understanding of individual autonomy, and that policymakers and public health officials must take a nuanced approach to addressing vaccine hesitancy.
In his book, Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All, Paul A. Offit, M.D. presents us with a thoroughly in-depth look behind the veil of the vaccine controversy. Specifically here in the United States. Offit starts us off with the history of vaccinations giving insights into not just their creation but the controversy that has surrounded them since the beginning. We learn how these questions around safety and personal rights started and who have been the major decision makers in history. We hear about the groups and people that support vaccinations and those that do not.
Requiring vaccinations is a highly debatable topic in the United States today. An article by Ronald Bayer, “The continuing tensions between individual rights and public health,” is one of the most reliable sources in the case study. The author has a PhD from the University of Chicago and focuses his research on issues of social justice and ethical matters. Bayer has also previously been a consultant to the World Health Organization on ethical issues related to public health. This makes him very knowledgeable about the topic and a highly credible source.
The Friendship of George George is a hard working man who relies on mental acuity to get the job. He has a natural leader feel to him because he commands all of the people around him. George is described as small man with dark undertones and strong and slender physical features. Despite his dark facial features, George is a man with a caring attitude and helps whoever needs him. George’s best friend is Lennie depends on him to know what to do and tell him what to do.
In the essay, the author summarizes how it is unacceptable to not be vaccinated. The author relates vaccinations to drunk driving and smoking. Interestingly, they compare drunk driving and smoking in public places which are against the law, but getting vaccinations are not considered a law. Considering that getting vaccinations are a choice while drunk driving are not choices makes these comparison statements invalid. Also, the author claims that the declining rates of vaccinations are the evidence from the outbreaks of current diseases.
Partner Summary The article “Should Anti-Vaxers be shamed or Persuaded”, is about how Anti-vaccination protesters should not be bullied or shamed into agreeing with the opposing viewpoint. The author distinguishes the difference between, bullying them into submission, and persuading them to the right side. Though not a parent, the author believes that kids should be vaccinated except in rare cases.
Vaccinations are in charge of numerous worldwide general wellbeing triumphs, for example, the annihilation of smallpox and huge diminishments in different genuine diseases like polio and measles. Indeed, even along these lines, vaccines have likewise long been the subject of different moral and ethical discussions. The key moral level headed discussions identified with vaccine regulation, advancement, and use, for the most part rotates around mandates, research and testing, informed consent, and access
After several hours of Julia vaccinating her child, he developed Autism. the child had lost his language, social skills, control over his body and got rapidly sick for 3 years. After this experience, Julia stopped her other children from getting vaccinated. However, Julia is not against vaccination, as she stated that “ I’m not out to band vaccines, I believe in the concept of a eradicating infectious diseases. But right now one size fits all for everybody is not working”(The doctors,2008).
Advancements in modern medicine serve to benefit the human race. The difficulty with such advancements is the differing of opinions that ensues on how to best manage these new medical miracles. The creation of a vaccine for HPV is no exception. During the course of the past several years, a fierce debate has arisen about whether to mandate this vaccination as a requirement for school attendance. It is without argument that creation of the HPV vaccine is a great advancement for modern medicine given the potential consequences to a rampant virus that this vaccine can prevent, but the decision on whether to use this vaccination on our children and young adults is best left to parents and individuals rather than a well-intentioned government mandate.
Over the last decade, there has been a movement to stop the requirement of vaccinations. Many parents want the right to make decisions for the well-being of their own children. They do not want the government to come into their household and tell them how they are to raise their children. They argue that the vaccinations are not safe and are not necessary because most of the diseases we mandate vaccines for are no longer prevalent. However, it is important that children be vaccinated to stop these diseases from reappearing.
Before I started this course I had only put minimal thought as to what our rights were in choosing to be vaccinated or not. From what I gathered from being a child and knowing what my nephews are required to have, it was my belief was that vaccinations are a mandated requirement and there was no getting around it. If parents wanted their child to be enrolled in day care, play in little league or just to attend school, it was a requirement to have physicals and for children to be vaccinated. I don’t have any children of my own and because of that I rarely had put any thought as to the number of vaccinations a child must have before the age of four until they reach adulthood. Though not having children does negate my sympathies towards parents’ concerns
Disease can overthrow a culture and spread like wildfire when not taken precaution against. However, there exists a fierce opposition against the mandate of vaccination by some groups of interest with the existence of adverse effects by vaccination to the human body as a reason. Although vaccination carries some health risks,
Many people may think that vaccination is a bad thing, that instead of preventing it causes illness, that is not natural. Natural or not, there are many reasons as to why we should vaccinate us and the younger generation. Most of the time children don’t like vaccination because it hurt, but is the responsibility of a parent to seek the wellbeing of his or her child. Vaccination it’s a preventive measure of various diseases. Unfortunately, things like the anti-vaccination movement, the misinformation on the Internet, and the believe that vaccination causes more damage than is worth, have led our society to think that it’s right not to vaccinate.
In every case where compulsory vaccinations were challenged, the Court upheld their constitutionality because they do not infringe on any rights. Notably, in Prince v. Massachusetts, the Court ruled that mandatory vaccines do not violate freedom of religion (Chemerinsky, Goodwin 606). In fact, the Court ruled religious exemption clauses as unlawful, since they only apply to students of a recognized denomination, as concluded in Brown v. Stone and Davis v. State (Chemerinsky, Goodwin 607-608). Furthermore, mandatory vaccines do not infringe on religious freedom because, “no matter how much a law burdens religious practices it is constitutional under [Employment v.] Smith so long as it does not single out religious behavior for punishment and was not motivated by a desire to interfere with religion” (Chemerinsky, Goodwin 609).
News Flash! Recent outbreaks of what the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) call vaccine-preventable diseases demonstrate the effects of the anti-vaccination movement. “Antivaxxers” as they’ve come to be called, as noticed on this author's Facebook page, are a population of parents who make a conscious decision not to vaccinate their children. The goal of this paper is to shed some light on the Antivaxxers, their arguments for choosing not to vaccinate their children, and research that proves the Antivaxxers’ theories are wrong. After all, vaccines aren’t something to be concerned about, they are proven to be effective.