Peer-reviewed article
Why We Should Eliminate Personal Belief Exemptions to Vaccine Mandates
We argue that personal belief exemptions to the mandate for childhood immunizations should not be allowed. Parents who choose not to immunize their children put both their own children and other children at risk. Other children are at risk…
We argue that personal belief exemptions to the mandate for childhood immunizations should not be allowed. Parents who choose not to immunize their children put both their own children and other children at risk. Other children are at risk because unimmunized children go to school or day care when they are contagious but asymptomatic, exposing many more children to potentially dangerous infections. The risks to children from disease are much higher than the risks of vaccines. There are, of course, some bona fide reasons why children should not be immunized. Some children have known allergies or other medical contraindications to certain immunizations. Immunization refusals based on parental beliefs, however, do not fall into this category. In those cases, children are denied the protection of immunizations without any medical or scientific justification. By eliminating personal belief exemptions to those childhood vaccines associated with contagious diseases that have high rates of childhood mortality, we would better protect children and would more fairly spread the burdens of this important public health program.
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.