Don't immunise your child, lose benefits?

[Guest sibon]

Then you are penalising those children, they have not chosen not to be vaccinated their parents made the choice for them.

 

Not really. The parents would still have responsibilities towards the children.

 

For example, the parents would still have a legal responsibility to ensure that their children were educated.

[El Cid]

The "no jab, no pay" policy may cost parents more than A$11,000 a year per child in lost benefit payments.

 

I would favour parents losing small amounts of benefits, if they do not follow government standards.

What should the basic government standards be; giving your child a good diet, exercise, being able to swim, intelligence, good health .......

[alternageek]

Correct.

 

It is a lousy policy too.

 

What we should do is to prevent unvaccinated children from using state facilities, such as schools. If people want to opt out of an important public health program, that is up to them. They shouldn't have the right to endanger others by their actions.

 

Its what they do in some states in the US. You cant attend public school or state uni/college without proving you have been vaccinated (ie: copy of your medical records from your pediatrician) in New York State. If you couldnt be vaccinated, you still need proof from your doctor as to why (medical reason)

[Plain Talker]

This winter was the first winter I was able to benefit from the flu vaccination, as I have an egg intolerance. For some years, I have had to decline the flu jab offer, and risk contracting flu as a result.

 

This year, apparently, (this is what the practice nurse told me) the vaccine was cultured differently, and it was not as strongly egged as it had been previously.

[medusa]

My sister and I were never vaccinated against most of the childhood diseases for a very good reason. My dad has full anaphylaxis allergy against eggs and most vaccines were cultured in egg albumin, meaning that if we had inherited his allergy a vaccine could kill us.

 

By the time I would have had the vaccinations I had already survived measles and rubella, but otherwise I have been very lucky to have survived quite a lot of the childhood exposures that could have given me whooping cough, or diphtheria or whatever else (bearing in mind I was born in the pre-MMR era).

 

I wonder whether the Australian government would build in a clause for situations like ours, or whether this is just a sledgehammer law to smash their walnut of a problem?

[Eater Sundae]

My sister and I were never vaccinated against most of the childhood diseases for a very good reason. My dad has full anaphylaxis allergy against eggs and most vaccines were cultured in egg albumin, meaning that if we had inherited his allergy a vaccine could kill us.

 

By the time I would have had the vaccinations I had already survived measles and rubella, but otherwise I have been very lucky to have survived quite a lot of the childhood exposures that could have given me whooping cough, or diphtheria or whatever else (bearing in mind I was born in the pre-MMR era).

 

I wonder whether the Australian government would build in a clause for situations like ours, or whether this is just a sledgehammer law to smash their walnut of a problem?

 

I would have assumed that the main reason for persuading as many people as possible to take up the jab was to protect people in your type of situation. On that basis, its unlikely that they'd forget.

[Starlet83]

My sister and I were never vaccinated against most of the childhood diseases for a very good reason. My dad has full anaphylaxis allergy against eggs and most vaccines were cultured in egg albumin, meaning that if we had inherited his allergy a vaccine could kill us.

 

By the time I would have had the vaccinations I had already survived measles and rubella, but otherwise I have been very lucky to have survived quite a lot of the childhood exposures that could have given me whooping cough, or diphtheria or whatever else (bearing in mind I was born in the pre-MMR era).

 

I wonder whether the Australian government would build in a clause for situations like ours, or whether this is just a sledgehammer law to smash their walnut of a problem?

 

I have read they will make provision for people who cannot be vaccinated due to medical grounds and for some religious reasons. I should imagine your reasons would be classed as.medical grounds

[VIEW2BUY]

Could be one way to start collecting DNA as a WORLD DNA DATABANK is so needed, will certainly help the Police time and resources trawling through evidence. Obviously the syringe will be placed in a labelled evidence bag or device. Are they not already sample collecting sneakily in prisons and institutions even hospitals are partaking I feel....The Police need to be concentrating more on the ever growing as expected Cyber crimes and Onland crimes will eventually be sewn up quicker with use of a World Databank. So the now newborn generation have no choice but to assist in the collection. As this is rather underhanded but telling the truth of their intentions would most definitely lead to panic.....So they're insisting by ways of bribery. The United Kingdom needs to show commitment to this massive task and WHERE OTHERS GO WE MUST FOLLOW.

Edited April 12, 2015 by VIEW2BUY

[tzijlstra]

Correct.

 

It is a lousy policy too.

 

What we should do is to prevent unvaccinated children from using state facilities, such as schools. If people want to opt out of an important public health program, that is up to them. They shouldn't have the right to endanger others by their actions.

 

If the other kids have had their jabs, they should be immune regardless.

[loraward]

 

If the other kids have had their jabs, they should be immune regardless.

 

Children are vulnerable to the diseases until they are vaccinated and they don't vaccinate new born babies. First dose of MMR is given at 12 months second dose between 3 and 5 years and 1 in 10 children are not immune until after second dose.