Tracking the next pandemic: Avian Flu Talk |
Mandatory vaccinations in Europe |
Post Reply |
Author | |
KiwiMum
Chief Moderator Joined: May 29 2013 Status: Offline Points: 29680 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: April 13 2021 at 3:59pm |
I saw this article this morning. The European Court of Human Rights has just declared that the human rights of a parent to veto vaccination for their children can be overruled for the "common good" and said that mandatory vaccination may well be necessary in a democratic country. This, in my opinion, is very sinister news and the start of the end. It's a slippery slope from here on in if this is allowed to stand. https://www.dw.com/en/echr-rules-obligatory-vaccination-may-be-necessary/a-57128443 ECHR rules obligatory vaccination may be necessaryThe ruling is the first time that the European Court of Human Rights has weighed in on the issue of compulsory vaccinations. The decision could play a role in efforts to end the coronavirus pandemic. Parents had protested Czech rules that schoolchildren should be vaccinated to attend class The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg ruled on Thursday that compulsory vaccinations would not contravene human rights law — and may be necessary in democratic societies. The ruling came following the evaluation of a complaint brought to the court by Czech families regarding compulsory jabs for children. "The measures could be regarded as being 'necessary in a democratic society,'" the court judgment read. Although the ruling did not deal directly with COVID-19 vaccines, experts believe it could have implications for the vaccination drive against the virus, especially for those who have so far stated a refusal to accept the jab. This judgment "reinforces the possibility of a compulsory vaccination under conditions of the current COVID-19 epidemic," Nicolas Hervieu, a legal expert specializing in the ECHR, told AFP news agency. What was the court ruling about?The decision said that the compulsory vaccines administered by Czech health authorities were in line with the "best interests" of children. "The objective has to be that every child is protected against serious diseases, through vaccination or by virtue of herd immunity," it added. The court ruled that the Czech health policy was not in violation of Article 8 on the right to respect for private life in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights.By Czech law, children must be vaccinated against nine diseases including diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, hepatitis B and measles. The case was brought to the court by families who had been fined, or whose children had been refused access to a nursery for failing to comply with their legal vaccination duty. A precedent for COVID-19 vaccination drivesCountries across Europe have seen a swell of disinformation regarding the coronavirus pandemic. This has led people to not only be skeptical about the coronavirus itself, but also about the COVID-19 vaccines. Anti-vaxxers — people who refuse to receive vaccines, or to vaccinate their children — have spread various conspiracy theories about why governments want to vaccinate their populations. As a result, governments may be contending with large segments of society who refuse to be vaccinated, making the goal of herd immunity that much more difficult. Although the ruling by the ECHR may have set the precedent that obligatory vaccinations do not contravene the European Convention on Human Rights, this does not mean European countries will force people to be vaccinated. |
|
Those who got it wrong, for whatever reason, may feel defensive and retrench into a position that doesn’t accord with the facts.
|
|
Dutch Josh
Adviser Group Joined: May 01 2013 Location: Arnhem-Netherla Status: Offline Points: 95677 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Although the ruling by the ECHR may have set the precedent that obligatory vaccinations do not contravene the European Convention on Human Rights, this does not mean European countries will force people to be vaccinated. DJ: When you look at the history of mandatory vaccinations-proberbly worldwide-smallpox vaccinations were a rule in many countries up till the end of smallpox. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine#Early_vaccination[/url] or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine#Early_vaccination ; As vaccination spread, some European countries made it compulsory. Concern about its safety led to opposition and then repeal of legislation in some instances.[69][70] Compulsory infant vaccination was introduced in England by the 1853 Vaccination Act. By 1871, parents could be fined for non-compliance, and then imprisoned for non-payment.[71] This intensified opposition, and the 1898 Vaccination Act introduced a conscience clause. This allowed exemption on production of a certificate of conscientious objection signed by two magistrates. Such certificates were not always easily obtained and a further Act in 1907 allowed exemption by a statutory declaration which could not be refused. Although theoretically still compulsory, the 1907 Act effectively marked the end of compulsory infant vaccination in England.[72] In the United States vaccination was regulated by individual states, the first to impose compulsory vaccination being Massachusetts in 1809. There then followed sequences of compulsion, opposition and repeal in various states. By 1930 Arizona, Utah, North Dakota and Minnesota prohibited compulsory vaccination, 35 states allowed regulation by local authorities, or had no legislation affecting vaccination, whilst in ten states, including Washington, D.C. and Massachusetts, infant vaccination was compulsory.[73] Compulsory infant vaccination was regulated by only allowing access to school for those who had been vaccinated.[74] Those seeking to enforce compulsory vaccination argued that the public good overrode personal freedom, a view supported by the U.S. Supreme Court in Jacobson v. Massachusetts in 1905, a landmark ruling which set a precedent for cases dealing with personal freedom and the public good DJ-Only a few countries will translate "mandatory vaccinations" into grabbing unvaccinated people from the street and force vaccination...The goal is to "increase pressure" but in practice communications do a much better job then "vaccination by rule"... For some jobs or schools vaccinations may be mandatory-part of a deal to get into that position. In most cases 70-90% immunity=herd immunity..you do not need to get to the 100% to be effective. |
|
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein |
|
EdwinSm,
Moderator Joined: April 03 2013 Status: Offline Points: 24065 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
It is an interesting debate.....the rights of an individual vs the rights of someone else not to be harmed by my actions. ps. with full consent of the doctor we omitted some of the common vaccinations for our new born daughter as a condition my wife had raised the risk level of some vaccinations. So while I am generally vaccination I am aware that in cases there are medical reasons that change the equation. pps. I believe that the court ruling allows for medical exceptions (I am in a rush to go out and don't have time to look it up - sorry). |
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum |