Critical Thinking Paper

Jaya Hinton
CAP 9
5/1/15

To Vaccinate or Not to Vaccinate

In recent years there had been outbreaks of the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella in
large part due to individuals rejection of immunization schedules. By refusing to
immunize their children, these individuals put the developing immune systems of their

children at risk, compromise herd immunity, and cause insurance premiums to rise.
The U.S. Constitution does not protect those who refuse to immunize their children
because of the potentially harmful impacts on the larger community. It is imperative that
the CDC and FDA uses its authority to mandate that individuals comply with vaccination
schedules in order to insure the economic and physical prosperity of the community.
The fear of vaccinations began when the first vaccinations were created. In
1809, the first vaccine against smallpox was created in Massachusetts, and in 1902 it
became mandatory that citizens take it to avoid paying a five dollar fine (about one
hundred dollars today). People were thrilled and went to take it nearly eradicating the
disease, but once the disease became rare, people no longer felt the need to get a
vaccination for it and even began to fear what the injections were putting into their body,
and the Public health Service Act, which gives the Secretary of Health and Human
Services the authority to keep diseases from entering the United States from foreign
countries or from travelling between states, does not extend to federally-mandated
vaccinations of all citizens ("Vaccines"). When the majority of a parents understanding
of vaccines come from science fiction and internet articles posted by other scared and
commonly misinformed moms they become scared for their children as well, and since
all states have mandatory vaccination laws that include limited exemptions for religious,
medical, or philosophical beliefs, people try to use that to their advantage (Vaccines).
However these exemptions are not very limited as anyone can assert that they have a
philosophical belief against vaccinations out of fear.
Everyone is affected by the decision of the few who refuse to vaccinate their
children. Herd Immunity, or the general immunity of a population due to the immunity

of a large percentage of that population is put at risk when a large number of people in
that herd refuse to be vaccinated. There is no general immunity of a population if no
one in the population is immune. Refusing to vaccinate or be vaccinated puts everyone
in the community at a greater risk. Low vaccination rates in 1989 caused a Measles
outbreak which resulted in 136 Measles related deaths and 55,000 hospitalized
patients, the majority of these patients being young children whose immune systems
were too weak to fight off diseases that are as strong as the Measles or Rubella.
Despite assertions of philosophical differences, the courts have routinely held that in
matters of public health, individual liberties may be repressed in order to keep the
country as a whole safe. In 1902 the vaccine against smallpox in Massachusetts
became mandatory. If a person chose not to take it they would be subjected to a five
dollar fine- about 100 dollars today. A man named Jacobson refused to get vaccinated,
refused to pay the fine, and appealed to take his case to court. According to Wendy K.
Mariner, "the question was whether the state had overstepped its own authority and
whether the sphere of personal liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the 14th
Amendment included the right to refuse vaccination." The court had to find a way to
interpret the Constitution to take into consideration personal liberties, the safety of the
greater population, and the amount of power and control state laws have at the time and
should have in the future, but, according to Wendy K. Mariner, author of Its Not Your
Great-Great-Grandfathers Public Health Law, in most respects, Jacobson was an
easy case. The decision held that a state may require healthy adults to accept an
effective vaccination when an existing epidemic endangers a communitys population."
For the same reason the government can suspend the first amendment in times of war

to ensure the safety of the population, they suspend the Due Process Clause of the
fourteenth amendment to ensure the health of the general population, "but it is equally
true that in every well-ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of
its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the
pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable
regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand" ("Jacobson v
Massachusetts: Its Not Your Great-Great-Grandfathers Public Health Law").
The fear of vaccinations stems from the notion that vaccinations can cause
autism, and even though that fact has been disproved it is continuously believed by
people all over the world, research shows that thimerosal [the ingredient in vaccines
believed to cause autism] does not cause ASD. In fact, a 2004 scientific review by the
IOM concluded that "the evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between
thimerosalcontaining vaccines and autism" ("Concerns about Autism- Vaccine Safety").
The fact that this theory had been disproved should deter people from refusing to
vaccinate their children and endanger other people. Another common argument against
vaccinating children is that naturally acquired immunity is more natural and more
effective than chemically acquired immunity. According to the history of vaccines,
Some people argue that the immunity gained from surviving a natural infection provides
better protection than that provided by vaccines. While its true that natural immunity
lasts longer in some cases than vaccine-induced immunity can, the risks of natural
infection outweigh the risks of immunization for every recommended vaccine. It is
more likely that the child may die, or live its life crippled by the disease from which his or
her parents refused to vaccinate. Further, it can put the community at risk. Chemically

acquired immunity is not dangerous, less beneficial, or less effective. It is, in fact more
effective since it is also preventive. It helps to ensure the safety of the child and his or
her peers. Any person who argues that it is constitutional does not realize or
understand that when your actions are endangering others, they are no longer protected
under the constitution.
The United States already has a problem with high taxes and insurance
premiums, and without vaccinations, those premiums will skyrocket. Insurance
premiums are calculated mainly by projecting what the amount of risk is for the
occurrence of a condition based upon its past frequency. When the Measles are rare,
expenses relating to the disease do not affect the insurance rate, but as they become
more prominent insurance will note that there is a possibility that their clients will
contract it and raise the rates. If the rate of Measles, the Mumps, or Rubella increases
in the slightest, insurance companies will charge more money for coverage. It is
wasteful and absolutely ridiculous to give more money to insurance companies when it
is possible to save money and protect your family at the same time.
There is only one way to go about ensuring the health and safety of our
community, and that is for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Center for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to mandate vaccinations. The on-time
immunization of children is imperative to the overall physical health of the community. If
vaccination schedules rely upon parents, they are less likely to be scheduled thereby,
leaving communities unnecessarily susceptible to preventable diseases and increased
health costs.

Works Cited
"Concerns about Autism- Vaccine Safety." Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. Centers for Disease Prevention and Control, 17 Mar. 2015.
Web. 30 Mar. 2015. <http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/
autism/>.
Mariner, Wendy K. "Jacobson v Massachusetts: Its Not Your
Great-Great-Grandfathers Public Health Law." American Journal of Public
Health (2005): n. pag. US National Library of Medicine National
Institutes of Health. Web. 29 Mar. 2015. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pmc/articles/PMC1449224/>.
"Misconceptions About Vaccines." The History of Vaccines. The College of
Physicians of Philadelphia, 31 July 2014. Web. 10 May 2015.
<http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/
misconceptions-about-vaccines>.
"Vaccines." Opposing Viewpoints in Context. GALE CENGAGE Learning, 2015. Web. 31
Mar. 2015.
<http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?
failOverType=&query=&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&di splayquery=&mode=view&displayGroupName=Reference&limiter=&u=mcps_blair&currPage=
&disableHighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&source=&search_within_results=&

p=OVIC&action=e&catId=GALE
%7C00000000LVZI&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7C PC3010999291>.

Annotated Bibliography
"Concerns about Autism- Vaccine Safety." Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. Centers for Disease Prevention and Control, 17 Mar. 2015.
Web. 30 Mar. 2015. <http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/
autism/>.
This source provided information directly from the CDC that helps to disprove the counter
argument and support the pro-vaccine thesis.
Mariner, Wendy K. "Jacobson v Massachusetts: Its Not Your
Great-Great-Grandfathers Public Health Law." American Journal of Public
Health (2005): n. pag. US National Library of Medicine National
Institutes of Health. Web. 29 Mar. 2015. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pmc/articles/PMC1449224/>.
This source provided a reliable source that supports the pro-immunization viewpoint and
provides information for the constitutionality argument allowing with proving the claim.
"Misconceptions About Vaccines." The History of Vaccines. The College of
Physicians of Philadelphia, 31 July 2014. Web. 10 May 2015.
<http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/
misconceptions-about-vaccines>.
This source provided reliable information regarding the benefits of acquired immunity over
natural immunity in support of my thesis.

Ropeik, David. "not Vaccinated? Not Acceptable." Los Angeles Times 18 July 2011:
n. pag. SIRS Researcher. Web. 14 Mar. 2015. <http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/
hst-article-display?id=SMD0990H-0-7022&artno=0000316927&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=p
ro%2DVaccination&title=Not%20Vaccinated%3F%20Not
%20Acceptable&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&l nk=Y&ic=N>.
This source provided strong evidence for the pro-immunization argument. Written by a harvard
University Professor and author, it is a reliable source meant to educate people on why they
should vaccinate their children.
"Vaccines." Opposing Viewpoints in Context. GALE CENGAGE Learning, 2015. Web. 31
Mar. 2015.
<http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?
failOverType=&query=&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&di splayquery=&mode=view&displayGroupName=Reference&limiter=&u=mcps_blair&currPage=
&disableHighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&source=&search_within_results=&
p=OVIC&action=e&catId=GALE
%7C00000000LVZI&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7C PC3010999291>.
This source provided a reliable database with articles containing information on the proimmunization argument.
"Vaccine Controversies." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 27 Apr. 2010. Web. 31 Mar. 2015.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversies>.
Though not the most reliable source, Wikipedia has provided a broad overview of both sides to
the argument allowing me to further my knowledge on the subject from an unbiased source.
"Vaccines Pros and Cons." ProCon. N.p., 6 Feb. 2015. Web. 30 Mar. 2015.
<http://vaccines.procon.org>.
This source provided reliable information that could be used for both the main and counter
arguments. It shows an unbiased view of both sides and will be a useful source for next year as
well.