Yes, even more the government is inconsistent if it does not enter this obligation.Although the Constitution confers a number of inalienable rights on its citizens and assigns people in general, a vaccination obligation does not violate them.
Many argue that everyone lives an immunity of body and that therefore the government cannot oblige anyone to ‘ stop needles ‘ in his or her body.However, the government does require children to go to school. In the same way as it can be argued that the government, because of the immunity of the body, cannot force its citizens to bring their bodies to the same place daily.
Why does the Netherlands still have compulsory schooling?Compulsory schooling is only applicable to minors.
That argumentation works as follows.In principle, children can be opposed to education, but they will be forced to go to school. This has to do with the fact that children are still competent for the law and are therefore not deemed to be capable of estimating their own interests on values. Because the government believes that education is vital for the development of each child in combination with the incapacity of children, it requires each child to go to school until their 18th, even if the child does not want it. However, that leaves another possibility, the possibility that parents do not want the child to go to school, still undiscussed.In that case, the Government also requires children to go to school, in fact, they even punish the parents if the child does not go to school. This is what the government does, because it considers the value of education for its citizens to be essential. In that case, the Government believes that it must protect its citizens/children against the will of the parents in the interests of the child.
The above argumentation should be applied in exactly the same way to the vaccination dilemma.In the event that the child does not want to be vaccinated (medical reasons are left), the Government must establish that the child is acting capable and in the present case that the parents believe they are trying to prevent vaccination of their children, the government should The health and rights of the Child.
If the government does not know how to introduce a vaccination obligation, then I wonder, on the basis of the above argumentation, why the government believes that they are obliged to leave children to school and I am convinced that they are therefore the compulsory should abolish.
PS: This whole argumentation has the underlying assumption that the vaccination obligation applies to children and that an exception will be made for medical exceptions in which vaccination is life-threatening.
Would be nice, but I think the Dutch policy is not capable of doing so.
The standard vaccinations of yesteryear for sure.Diphtheria, measles, smallpox (maybe), whooping cough. The others should get a better explanation. Why only girls the HPV vaccinations. Boys cannot get cervical cancer, but they can spread the virus. A herd-immunity can thus never develop. Religious and/or philosophical opposition should be solved with Stalinist methods if necessary.
‘, ‘ No, I myself am not against vaccinations, but I am just afraid of needles (prick anxiety) and when I see such a needle, I get nasty hallucinations/flashbacks
“,” As far as I am concerned, you cannot oblige anyone to have their child inocuities.Imagine, against your desire, to let your child’s skin pierce and inject substances that you have no confidence in. The truth does not necessarily lie with the government.
My children are 27 and 30 and have had all the vaccinations, up to and including hepatitis, which was then a new option.
The reactions were violent, especially the first time.If I had to decide now whether to give an opinion on my future grandchildren, I would wait until after the first half year and the BMR should not give in a cocktail.
I am then shocked at what a vaccination-when still with Mercury-with a baby of 3 months diet.I have fed my children myself and have been given nothing but breastfeeding for the youngest to 6 months and I have a hypo-allergenic diet. That proved necessary for the youngest.
With such sensitive children, I crab it behind my ears, if as a mother you have to make such an effort to give your child the right nutrition, to prevent allergic reactions, I would also prefer nothing else in that body to stop the first half year than mother Milk.
There is hardly any use of thimerosal or other fancy names that come down to the same: Mercury salts, but aluminum does not belong in a baby at home either.
I don’t trust industry.You can not choose, there is a view on the quality and the immunity also does not last forever. It is unrealistic to expect that. And it is therefore not a matter of blaming people against vaccination for the reoccurrence of measles.
BMR is a live vaccination.It is best that measles are brought into rotation by vaccinations. There is live measles virus in the vaccine.
We do not get fair figures about sickness and death after vaccinations.We cannot make a choice and have no influence on the choices and on the quality. With a compulsory vaccination program, the industry has a free playing field and there is no pressure tool anymore. Then parents can no longer vote with the feet.
I mention only one phenomenon: what the shaken baby syndrome is called-parents get the blame that they would have shaken their baby, the child sits under the bruises and dies in some cases-according to some parents Vaccination.Parents with such a shocking experience, losing their young child, get no hearing and are criminalised. As long as vaccinations are declared sacred, such accidents are pushed under the mat. Undesirable.
First good and objective research, and no vaccination obligation.