• GrymEdm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    105
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Kids can’t protect themselves. They don’t have the ability to make their own informed choices. Please don’t destroy the evidence-based protections we have that keep them from dying, being crippled, having to get a machine to breathe for them permanently, etc. We have decades of data and it’s overwhelmingly clear: vaccines save lives and do so incredibly safely.

    Every time a child is seriously harmed because a parent ignored vaccine guidelines the parents should be charged with criminal neglect. It’s no different not different enough than if you fed your children say, mercury, and then claimed you believed it was helpful because of Facebook gurus or similarly unaccredited sources. In both situations a child is being permanently harmed due to choices they have no ability to understand, resist or protest and thus we need laws to protect them.

    Also, not only are the anti-vaxxer parents endangering their own children, but also everyone else’s by increasing risk of their kids becoming vectors/reservoirs for infection and potential mutation into new strains that could evade current vaccines. “High mutation rate is an important characteristic of viruses that can enable them to evade immune responses and propagate infection.” So not only are anti-vaxxers making choices for their own kids, but potentially also others’ kids. It’s not guaranteed but it’s rolling some high-stakes dice.

    • Norgur@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      62
      ·
      7 months ago

      Not to forget, making choices for the very weakest we have: Children that are too sick to be vaccinated. Your “uneasiness” towards a little jab millions of people have survived absolutely fine might take someone else’s little wonder away. Because you circle jerked a bit on facefuck or shitter.

        • Norgur@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          7 months ago

          Absolutely. Yet, neglecting the sick in a Facebook-fueled self-righteous frenzy of flawed “uhm akchually” is even more disgusting in my eyes than endangering the other healthy children is.

          • GladiusB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            They are a afraid. And rather than facing the fear in a responsible and healthy way they hide behind conspiracy. It’s oddly paralleled to political conspiracies. The mental health crisis has a far bigger reach than just horrible gun problems. People refuse to accept their failed attempts to rationalize their own feelings of fear. It’s scary thing to have the world dying. I wish they would just own it.

    • cbarrick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s no different than if you fed your children say, mercury, and then claimed you believed it was helpful because of Facebook gurus or similarly unaccredited sources.

      I totally agree that children should be vaccinated.

      But I just want to point out that there is a difference between actively doing something to harm your kid, and passively not doing something to protect your kid.

      Lack of protection is not equivalent to active harm.

      Parents should still be required to vaccinate their kids.

      • snooggums@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        7 months ago

        Letting your kids play in traffic isn’t acceptable even though it is passively not doing something to protect them. That’s because being different doesn’t mean that one is always fine.

        Not vaccinating kids* is like letting your kids play in traffic and letting them drag other kids into traffic too.

        *the exception are kids who can’t be vaccinated for medical reasons

      • GrymEdm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I’ll upvote, agree they aren’t exactly the same, and edit but I’ll also argue they should both be illegal. That is admittedly opinion but let me explain. My reasoning is there are other examples of passively, but still criminally, failing to protect a child: improper storage of firearms, explosives, or chemicals. Not using seatbelts or safety seats. Failing to secure medical aid for a desperately ill child. I am not a lawyer, but those seem to set precedents where the adult wasn’t actively putting a gun in the kid’s hand or causing a fatal illness but they were still prosecuted.

        Given the prevalence of anti-vaxxer parents, it seems current law doesn’t make failure to vaccinate your young child a criminal charge. My argument, and I know there are other views, is it should be (although defining criminal limits would require work). We protect kids in other situations where there’s no ill intent and IMO that’s a good thing. I know my position errs towards caution and is somewhat extreme, but polio is pretty extreme. The arguments that anti-vaxxers bring eerily mirror those brought by people who resisted seat belts (and I know you clearly aren’t one, just continuing the reasoning). 40 years later I think most agree mandatory seat belts proved to be a good and reasonable requirement that saves thousands every year.