Many childhood diseases can now be prevented through the use of vaccines. Should parents be made by law to immunize their children against common diseases, or should individuals have the right to choose not to immunize their children?

Many childhood diseases can now be prevented through the use of vaccines. Should parents be made by law to immunize their children against common diseases, or should individuals have the right to choose not to immunize their children?

There is a fierce debate aligned with the issue about preventing several ailments through the mandatory use of vaccines. While some lend full-blooded support to this proposal, others protest and feel that it should be the prerogative of families.

The government is responsible to provide resources such as colleges, schools, jobs, hospitals, housing schemes, and to name a few, to its countrymen. Likewise, treatment and cure come to their priority. Hence, like other schemes, parents must vaccinate their wards from childhood to eradicate several diseases, and give a healthy and disease-free life to them under the supervision of the law, otherwise they might skip on some, or other pretext. 

Moreover, by implementing this policy they would set the precedents to work hand in hand with the policy makers to achieve the desired goal of a  healthy nation. According to the report published in Hindustan Times, India, that covid-19 immunization was made mandatory for entering at all the workplaces, schools, and colleges, which has not only saved many lives but also protected the future generations from ill-effects of infectious virus-borne diseases.

Nevertheless, such decisions, whether they would like to inject their little ones, or not, should be on parents. Furthermore, many medicines work on trial bases with no evidence of providing an appropriate care and cure to juveniles. For instance, in the USA, many young people who had taken vaccination for Hepatitis B in the age of 3-5 reported blood pressure fluctuations and weakening their liver function and henceforth, this situation created distrust among many.

To conclude, although mothers  and fathers choose the best facilities for their wards, by trusting their policy makers, they afford a safe life to their young ones,and such a move will help ensure unconditional compliance with the inoculation process.  

Many childhood diseases can now be prevented through the use of vaccines. Should parents be made by law to immunize their children against common diseases or should individuals have the right to choose not to immunize their children?

Many childhood diseases can now be prevented through the use of vaccines. Should parents be made by law to immunize their children against common diseases or should individuals have the right to choose not to immunize their children?

In contemporary times, with the advent of immunization, juveniles can be afforded safeguards against myriad dreadful ailments. This has motivated many to suggest making families legally obligated to opt for child vaccination, whereas some feel it should be individual prerogative.  

To start with, offering freedom regarding the inoculation of their young ones, many will evade it; superstition or communal beliefs being the rationale behind it, eventually predisposing the former to innumerable enervating disorders: polio, whooping cough, measles, and so on. Along with this, the latter with low immunity will get sick often as they are not immunized, causing their parents to rush to the state for help as health is a state subject. Also, such casual conduct could result in infecting the other juveniles with communicable diseases; compromising the health of society. To corroborate, a recent case was analyzed wherein 30% youngsters of a village were infected with measles but due to lack of preventive measures and vaccination, others got infected too, jeopardizing the health of the whole village.  

Nevertheless, despite being unfounded, the skeptics vehemently opine that various vaccinations are irrelevant now as the illnesses they treated are in a history; however, pharma companies manufacture and sell to earn more money from the public, retailers and governments. Moreover, children survived disease outbreaks even before the advent of such programs, so there is no need to push them to use it. Also, it violates the concept of natural immunity against several bacterias and viruses, making them dependent on immunity boosters. Thus, people should have their own say for getting their wards inoculated.

Overall, despite having some unsubstantiated drawbacks, this program fetches numerous benefits; it will act as a blessing in disguise keeping debilitating and transferable diseases at bay, and creating a better and healthy society.  

Many childhood disease can now be prevented through the use of vaccines. Should parents be made by law to immunize their children against common diseases or should individuals have the right to choose not to immunize their children?

Many childhood disease can now be prevented through the use of vaccines.
Should parents be made by law to immunize their children against common diseases or should individuals have the right to choose not to immunize their children?

 

Ielts Essay Immunization should be mandatory 

Radical advancements in medicine have afforded humanity a potent weapon that can help them overcome several diseases, right from the childhood, with help of a simple vaccination. This has, however, raised a moral and an ethical argument whether parents should be allowed to exercise their discretion of evading vaccinations for their little ones. I feel, this is an idea worthy of indignation, and any such rights must be wrested from the parents. 

Health is a state subject; hence, to ensure that everybody in a country stays healthy, governments should be vested with the jurisdiction to decide providing safeguards to the populace, including inoculating young ones. Failing this, health budget allocations for combative measures are bound to shoot through the roof, when growing children would be afflicted by the ailments that could have been avoided by a simple medical intervention. These very parents, who chose to  evade immunization,  would come back asking for medical assistance for children who missed out critical preventive treatment.

Moreover, letting parents circumventing vaccination process, for their  wards, would amount to jeopardizing the very future of the society; the present state of physical and mental health of young ones helps forecast how the society would fare in the future. In case, little ones are plagued by ailments, that could have been avoided, and that could actually turn serious at a later stage, would cast an evil shadow on not only the overall health index of society but also impede productivity.

To sum up, it can be said that appeasing parents in this case can prove to be an expensive mistake: putting the health of the future of society at stake; hence immunization process in the childhood should be mandatory, regardless of what mothers and fathers think.