Should non-vaxers be held liable?

[littlec]

I came across this in the Michigan Law Review. I understand it's not happening (yet). However, I was wondering what your thoughts were.
http://www.michiganlawreview.org/art...ivil-liability

Here are my thoughts/questions:
why would the unvaccinated parent be to blame and not the vaccine failure? Further, what about parents who have a vaccine injured child, are there other children exempt from this? What about those with religious objections to vaccines...would something like this infringe upon religious freedom?

Does the person infected with a VPD have any legal recourse if the person who transmitted it was also vaccinated? What if an adult is not up to date on their boosters- or because of their age, a certain vaccine (hib, prevnar, rotavirus) wasn't on their childhood schedule...should they liable as well?

Will the failure of the vaccination ever come into play?

I get that this is all hypothetical at this point, but I still thought it may make for an interesting discussion.

[Otto]

The argument seems pretty weak on its face. There's already a tort for negligent transmission of infectious disease, and inventing some additional breach of duty doesn't really add anything to it.

The hosts of pox parties, on the other hand, would seem to be in a position of real liability if things go awry.

[nia82]

I don't think a law like that will ever come through, if it would, we would be out of this country in no time.
Where does it stop - all the people who go to work, supermarket or school with a sneeze and a cough transmitting it to others? Should we have a testing device at home then that tells us whether it is legal to leave the house or not? It is just crazy.

[Arduinna]

Does not compute. If they are so sure their vaxes work, then why would they be getting sick from the no vax people?

[Otto]

Originally Posted by Arduinna

Does not compute. If they are so sure their vaxes work, then why would they be getting sick from the no vax people?

This argument is both tired and specious.

[Arduinna]

so put me on ignore then

[AllyRae]

That arguement's kind of scary, really. Some people have legitimate reasons for not vaxing beyond a fear of the ingredients (by legitimate, I mean true confirmed medical reasons--allergies to ingredients, prior reactions to a vaccination that the CDC has stated was incompatible with further vaccination, immune deficiencies, etc.). It would be really awful if we were held legally liable because I have children with egg allergies who can't receive the flu vax, and I have an immune compromised child who can't receive vaccinations (her pediatrician even suggested we don't vax because she is immune deficient and had a reaction to the only 2 vaccines she had, likely because of her immune deficiency).

Now, I don't really have opinions on whether people who don't vax for other reasons should be held liable. I guess it's hard to say--I mean, the pertussis strain going around is not the same as what people were vaxed for, so when mutations happen, who's to say the vax would or would not have helped. But if a person who refused to give polio vaxes to their children went to a country with a endemic polio, was infected, brought it back to the US, and infected immune compromised individuals or those who otherwise couldn't be vaxed? That does seem a bit negligent...but I also suspect that many who wouldn't vax for things like that on MDC would likely avoid areas of the world with active cases, or at least do a little more in the way of precautions than just taking some homeopathics or something.

[carriebft]

I think there could be charges filed in some situations...like that situation in Germany were a child entered a doc office with symptoms of measles and infected three infants in the waiting room. 2 of those infants later came down with SSPE and are still suffering today. I could see myself going after the doctors office for lacking protocol with infectious disease patients which might spill over into the child's caretakers if they didnt follow set protocols...it would have to be more substantive than that but I can't see charges working in other ways?

has there ever been a case of charging a nonvaxer for something like this?

[AllyRae]

Originally Posted by carriebft

I think there could be charges filed in some situations...like that situation in Germany were a child entered a doc office with symptoms of measles and infected three infants in the waiting room. 2 of those infants later came down with SSPE and are still suffering today. I could see myself going after the doctors office for lacking protocol with infectious disease patients which might spill over into the child's caretakers if they didnt follow set protocols...it would have to be more substantive than that but I can't see charges working in other ways?

has there ever been a case of charging a nonvaxer for something like this?

But really, *shouldn't* a kid with measles be at the doctor? That doctor's office needs to have a better protocol for that. I know ours does, especially when we bring our DD in (even at almost 2, they put her straight in isolation whether she's sick or healthy, and lysol the halls so that the risk of her being infected is reduced. I know they don't do that for non-immune compromised people, but I'm sure if someone walked through with suspected measles, they'd be getting that kid back and in iso, fast.)

[carriebft]

He maybe should be there, but steps should be in place for possible contagious diseases. If the doctor doesn't have them, then I can see suing for that reason. If the parents did not follow them, again, reason there. other than these situations...I don't see how you can find that intent and all that needed to have a successful case.

note i am not a lawyer so I oculd be totally off here.

[AllyRae]

Originally Posted by carriebft

He maybe should be there, but steps should be in place for possible contagious diseases. If the doctor doesn't have them, then I can see suing for that reason. If the parents did not follow them, again, reason there.

Yeah, that I agree with. That was pretty apparent during that whole H1N1 thing--I couldn't believe there were still doctor's offices out there that had newborns in the same waiting room with dozens of people with the flu. DD's daughter was smart enough to say "no well baby checks for a few months except at this time, on these days, where we aren't going to have any sick visits".

[rabrog]

My main question is if child A is vax'd and gets a VPD, how in the world do they prove that it came from child B who is unvax'd and never got the disease? And even if child B did get the disease, if child A is any kind of social setting with other children, how do they prove who it "caused" the disease to be transmitted to child A?

If I get a cold at the store, I can't say "the lady in blue in the cereal aisle sneezed and I know it was her."

As for the "tired" argument about if vaccines are effective, it may be tired but it's so true. It all goes back to that. If people believe them to be effective and give them to their child, they should go after the manufacturer or damages from the vaccine injury fund (not that getting a VPD qualifies as an injury, I don't think....?).

And with the measles kid in Germany, the doc office should have been held liable and no one else. When the appt. was made I'm sure someone knew why the child was coming in. Masks should have been distributed and nurses should have met him at the door to bring him to a patient room immediately so there was as little exposure as possible. That's not the parent's fault or the child's fault (vax'd or not) for getting the disease.

Jenn

[carriebft]

I could see liability in a case like this as well:

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=17710

they knew their kids were exposed and their sibling was already positive. They got on a plane anyway.

[Otto]

Originally Posted by rabrog

As for the "tired" argument about if vaccines are effective, it may be tired but it's so true. It all goes back to that.

Except that nobody asserts that vaccines are 100% effective except for those who wish to erect this straw man.

[misidawnrn]

We don't vaccinate and would also put up a big fight before I let the goverment forcibly vax my children. Sounds pretty communist to me! I think the government needs to take the rafter out of their own eye before they pull the sliver out of mine!!! The put caps on insurance so people who DO have medical needs can't get the medical care they need while worrying about a disease in my child that hasn't even happened yet!

I look at it this way too, and I know someone said it was "tired"... I do not take my kids in public areas when they are sick with anything other than a runny nose. If you don't want "your" (I say generically) kids to get sick, vaccinate them, don't take them into public places or take the chance that they will be exposed to some random disease.

If anyone has looked up children suffering from Vaccine injury on places like Youtube...you would never play russian ruellette with your children like that. I am not going to take the chance that my beautiful vibrant girls will be turned into a human shell by harming them with vaccines. Needless to say, harming their immune system, reproductive system, neurological system etc etc etc.

If other people choose to vaccinate, great, that is their right as a parent to choose that for their children. It is my right to NOT vaccinate and I choose to exercise that right.

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by AllyRae

But really, *shouldn't* a kid with measles be at the doctor?

No kidding, so a sick kid in a Dr waiting room is grounds for a lawsuit if anyone else gets sick. That makes no sense at all.

[NaturalBirthGoddes]

Originally Posted by Otto

Except that nobody asserts that vaccines are 100% effective except for those who wish to erect this straw man.

So, vaxes are not dependable...so who is to say that 2 vaccinated kids don't transmit to each other?

No, if the government came down and said I had to vax my kids with this crap (in my opinion) that is on the market, we would move to another country. No way, no how.

[jeanine123]

So will the parents/guardians of a fully vaxed with DTaP child be charged if their child still harbored and spread the pertussis virus? After all, the vax doesn't prevent transmission, it just reduces the severity of the symptoms. Which could very well mean that they're out and about while still contagious. How about the adults who got vaxed for pertussis?

[CherryBomb]

Originally Posted by Otto

Except that nobody asserts that vaccines are 100% effective except for those who wish to erect this straw man.

[rhiandmoi]

In previous eras when we had a lot more disease outbreaks it was common for people to be imprisoned for failing to follow their quarantine requirements. This is I think often overlooked when we discuss how VPD were handled prior to vaccination. Nowadays people become outraged when they hear that quarantines were placed on healthy individuals that have been exposed to serious diseases. Before vaccination - that is what was done to prevent epidemics.


I think that if anyone has reason to suspect that they may have picked up a VPD or really any serious disease, they should minimize the risk to other people and stay home until the time when symptoms should have appeared has passed. It is part of being a responsible citizen of the world.

Originally Posted by Otto

The hosts of pox parties, on the other hand, would seem to be in a position of real liability if things go awry.

And attendees who don't get sick but go out into the world during the time when they could still be contagious. It's not fair to immune compromised people or people who do not produce adequate antibodies after vaccination.