Parents should choose whether to immunise their child

Question: Are vaccines safe?
Position‹3 of 3: We cannot say whether vaccines are safe
Argument1 of 3›: Parents should choose whether to immunise their child

Compulsory immunisation leads to concerns about freedom of choice and personal autonomy.

The argument

It is a fundamental right of parents to make decisions about their child’s welfare. In most countries, parental authority ensures parents can make decisions about their child’s welfare as they believe fit. Youth over the age of 15 (depending on the country or state) are generally allowed to request immunisation even if their parents object. Many jurisdictions in the Commonwealth use the Gillick competence argument for younger children if it is considered the child has “sufficient maturity and intelligence to understand the nature and implications of that treatment.”

Context

For accurate information on the efficiency of vaccines, consult the WHO website. Most countries recommend immunisations according to their specific immunisation policy or schedule. Other variations include vaccinations being mandatory, parents having to sign a form to opt-out of immunisation, and others such as Australia where access to welfare, state education or day care requires proof of immunisation status. Political pressure means these regulations change fairly regularly.

Premises

[P1]It is a fundamental right of parents to make decisions about their child's welfare. [P2] Most countries' parental authority lets parents decide as they see fit, while older youth may request immunisation themselves even over a parent's objection. [P3] Many Commonwealth jurisdictions extend this to younger children deemed mature enough to understand the treatment under the Gillick competence standard. [C] Therefore, where we cannot say for certain whether vaccines are safe, parents should choose whether to immunise their child.

Counter-arguments

The rights of the children who are unable to be immunised are equally important and they, or their parents, have no choice. It is an obligation as a member of society to protect those vulnerable children who are unable to be immunised by not exposing them unnecessarily to infectious diseases. Immunisation is the most effective way to do that.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The rights of the children who are unable to be immunised are equally important and they, or their parents, have no choice.