On Religious and Secular Exemptions. A Case Study of Childhood Vaccination Waivers

R. Pierik
{"title":"On Religious and Secular Exemptions. A Case Study of Childhood Vaccination Waivers","authors":"R. Pierik","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2807903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyses exemptions to general law through the prism of vaccine waivers in the United States. All US states legally require the vaccination of children prior to school or daycare entry, however this obligation is accompanied with a system of medical, religious and/or philosophical exemptions. Nonmedical exemptions became subject of discussion after the 2015 Disneyland measles outbreak in California, which unequivocally brought to light what had been brewing below the surface for a while: a slow but steady decline in vaccination rates in Western societies, resulting in the reoccurrence of measles outbreaks. This can be traced back to an increasing public questioning of vaccines by a growing anti-vaccination movement. In reaction to the outbreak and the public outrage it generated, several states proposed – and some already passed – Bills to eliminate nonmedical exemptions. I analyze two questions. First, can legal exemptions to mandatory childhood vaccination schemes for parents who oppose to vaccination (still) be justified? Second, should legal exemptions be limited to religious objections to vaccination, or should it also be granted to secular objections? Although the argument in the paper starts from the example of the USA, it seeks to provide a more general philosophical reflection on the question of exemptions to mandatory childhood vaccination.","PeriodicalId":307802,"journal":{"name":"Z-Medicine eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Z-Medicine eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2807903","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

This paper analyses exemptions to general law through the prism of vaccine waivers in the United States. All US states legally require the vaccination of children prior to school or daycare entry, however this obligation is accompanied with a system of medical, religious and/or philosophical exemptions. Nonmedical exemptions became subject of discussion after the 2015 Disneyland measles outbreak in California, which unequivocally brought to light what had been brewing below the surface for a while: a slow but steady decline in vaccination rates in Western societies, resulting in the reoccurrence of measles outbreaks. This can be traced back to an increasing public questioning of vaccines by a growing anti-vaccination movement. In reaction to the outbreak and the public outrage it generated, several states proposed – and some already passed – Bills to eliminate nonmedical exemptions. I analyze two questions. First, can legal exemptions to mandatory childhood vaccination schemes for parents who oppose to vaccination (still) be justified? Second, should legal exemptions be limited to religious objections to vaccination, or should it also be granted to secular objections? Although the argument in the paper starts from the example of the USA, it seeks to provide a more general philosophical reflection on the question of exemptions to mandatory childhood vaccination.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于宗教和世俗豁免。儿童疫苗豁免个案研究
本文通过美国疫苗豁免的棱镜来分析一般法的豁免。美国所有州在法律上都要求儿童在上学或进入日托所之前接种疫苗,但这一义务伴随着医疗、宗教和/或哲学豁免制度。2015年加州迪士尼乐园爆发麻疹疫情后,非医疗豁免成为讨论的主题,这明确地揭示了一段时间以来一直在酝酿的问题:西方社会的疫苗接种率缓慢但稳步下降,导致麻疹疫情再次爆发。这可以追溯到越来越多的反疫苗运动引起公众对疫苗越来越多的质疑。为了应对疫情及其引发的公愤,几个州提出了——有些州已经通过了——法案,以消除非医疗豁免。我分析了两个问题。首先,反对接种疫苗的父母(仍然)可以合法豁免强制性儿童疫苗接种计划吗?其次,法律上的豁免应该仅限于宗教上对疫苗接种的反对,还是也应该给予世俗上的反对?虽然论文中的论点从美国的例子开始,但它试图提供对强制性儿童疫苗接种豁免问题的更一般的哲学反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Do Kidney Exchanges Improve Patient Outcomes? The Effect of Mandatory Iodine Fortification on Cognitive Test Scores in Rural India Gamified Challenges in Online Weight-Loss Communities Insurance Expansions and Children's Use of Substance Use Disorder Treatment Right to Health and Role of Mental Health Institutions in Kerala
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1