Peer-reviewed article
Controversies in vaccine mandates.
Policies that mandate immunization have always been controversial. The controversies take different forms in different contexts. For routine childhood immunizations, many parents have fears about both short- and long-term side effects.…
Policies that mandate immunization have always been controversial. The controversies take different forms in different contexts. For routine childhood immunizations, many parents have fears about both short- and long-term side effects. Parental worries change as the rate of vaccination in the community changes. When most children are vaccinated, parents worry more about side effects than they do about disease. Because of these worries, immunization rates go down. As immunization rates go down, disease rates go up, and parents worry less about side effects of vaccination and more about the complications of the diseases. Immunization rates then go up. For teenagers, controversies arise about the criteria that should guide policies that mandate, rather than merely recommend and encourage, certain immunizations. In particular, policy makers have questioned whether immunizations for human papillomavirus, or other diseases that are not contagious, should be required. For healthcare workers, debates have focused on the strength of institutional mandates. For years, experts have recommended that all healthcare workers be immunized against influenza. Immunizations for other infections including pertussis, measles, mumps, and hepatitis are encouraged but few hospitals have mandated such immunizations-instead, they rely on incentives and education. Pandemics present a different set of problems as people demand vaccines that are in short supply. These issues erupt into controversy on a regular basis. Physicians and policy makers must respond both in their individual practices and as advisory experts to national and state agencies. The articles in this volume will discuss the evolution of national immunization programs in these various settings. We will critically examine the role of vaccine mandates. We will discuss ways that practitioners and public health officials should deal with vaccine refusal. We will contrast responses of the population as a whole, within the healthcare setting, and in the setting of pandemic influenza.
Related writing.
Why the Dutch Keep Pediatric Euthanasia Illegal
Pediatric euthanasia in The Netherlands has a unique legal status - it is illegal, openly practiced, and well-regulated. The most surprising part isn't the law that enabled this — it's what happened after.
Associations of Physician Perspectives, Personal Choices, and Counseling for Severe Congenital Heart Defects
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether physicians' perspectives of outcomes or personal choices are associated with prenatal counseling for termination of pregnancy (TOP) or perinatal hospice for severe congenital heart defects (CHDs). METHOD:…
Variation in the extent to which patient information leaflets describe potential benefits and harms of trial interventions: a commentary
Clinical trial participants must understand the possible risks and benefits of trial interventions before providing their informed consent to participate. The aim of this commentary is twofold: to summarize the discrepancies in the extent…
Pediatric Gender Medicine—Reply
Third, emerging evidence suggests that modulating glycosylation pathways could offer a novel therapeutic strategy for asthma management.Xie et al 5 proposed that targeting glycan recognition receptors, such as sialic acid-binding…
About the author
John D. Lantos is a pediatrician and bioethicist writing on AI in medicine, neonatal intensive care, and end-of-life decisions. His essays appear in JAMA, JAMA Pediatrics, the Hastings Center Report, the New England Journal of Medicine, and Aeon. Read more about John.