Measles are making a comeback, so what does the Church teach about vaccines?

[Joe_5859]

Do the research, make the decision and act on it. It is a personal decision without moral or theological repercussions.

I think it does have moral and theological repercussions, but at the same time, I think that reasonable Catholics can come to different conclusions on the issue.

The doctor in the article was very much in favor of vaccines, but he still says “But still I know parental consciences are bothered by this and I think some rightfully so, and so I think we need to respect that.”

This seems to be one of those topics where it is very difficult for one side to understand the other. I see good Catholics striving to live out the Church’s teaching on respect for life who come to opposite conclusions on this issue. I certainly have my opinion, but I try really hard not to denigrate those who disagree. We are all trying to make a good moral decision.

 

[Brandon_Cal]

We don’t use the vaccines derived from aborted fetal cells (like the MMR) for our daughter, and we don’t do some of the others, either (flu) more out of practical considerations.

I am not sure how a Catholic can in good conscience use those. We, at least, cannot.

I think many Catholics come to terms with it since the action of receiving a vaccine is neither moral nor immoral, and the MMR vaccine is only “tainted” historically (i.e. in the way it was initially engineered). If every single MMR vaccine required the killing of a new infant then I think you’d have a point, but that isn’t the case with MMR. What’s done is done, the baby was aborted, the MMR vaccine is now here to stay. It isn’t immoral to benefit from something that owes its history to a moral evil, otherwise everything that is good would be “tainted”. Go back far enough in time and you’ll find some evil actions bringing about the technology.

 

[Kurisu35712]

Do the research, make the decision and act on it. It is a personal decision without moral or theological repercussions.

If your intent in withholding a vaccine was to purposefully expose your child to the virus, then it would be morally wrong. If, however, there are other reasons you chose not to vaccinate your child, they would not automatically be morally wrong. It would depend entirely on your reasons.

I would consider a person who decides not to vaccinate their healthy child based on faulty reasoning and scientific ignorance to be morally wrong. There are many children, not even including infants too young for vaccines, who are immunocompromised and cannot be vaccinated, even if their parents want them to be. Vaccination of children capable of receiving it protects those children and adults who cannot be vaccinated. The only reason you should be able to claim for not vaccinating your child, IMHO, is a compromised immune system. Anything else is negligent both for your child and for the public.

 

[triumphguy]

I think people have forgotten how truly nasty measles, mumps and rubella are.

I think people undervalue the real risks of these disease, and completely over value the risks (if any) of the vaccines.

 

[Beautiful]

Deliberately exposing innocent children to potentially fatal diseases has no moral repercussions?!

cnn.com/2015/01/30/health/california-measles-outbreak/index.html

Exactly my thought. The people who avoided getting vaccines for their children not only have put their own children at risk but also infants that aren’t old enough to get the full vaccine. Those babies who are currently not old enough for full vaccine risk getting measles and possible death.

I don’t mean to sound vindictive but it sounds like these parent’s that have chosen not to vaccinate might have blood on their hands.

 

[Rebecca_Louise_1]

I heard an interview with a journalist on NPR this week who wrote an article comparing attitudes towards vaccination in the United States vs, Sweden. In Sweden, people will get vaccinated even though they may believe the vaccine won’t be effective for them because they believe they have a responsibility to protect others. Also, the Associated Press ran an article this week about a doctor/pediatrician who put a sign up in his waiting room that he will no longer accept or retain patients who refuse vaccination. His rationale was that unvaccinated people in his waiting room are putting other people in the waiting room at risk.

Here is the article by the journalist comparing Sweden with the USA:

newrepublic.com/article/120877/disneyland-measles-outbreak-caused-distrust-american-society.

 

[Beautiful]

I heard an interview with a journalist on NPR this week who wrote an article comparing attitudes towards vaccination in the United States vs, Sweden. In Sweden, people will get vaccinated even though they may believe the vaccine won’t be effective for them because they believe they have a responsibility to protect others. Also, the Associated Press ran an article this week about a doctor/pediatrician who put a sign up in his waiting room that he will no longer accept or retain patients who refuse vaccination. His rationale was that unvaccinated people in his waiting room are putting other people in the waiting room at risk.

Here is the article by the journalist comparing Sweden with the USA:

newrepublic.com/article/120877/disneyland-measles-outbreak-caused-distrust-american-society.

Commendations to this ped/doc! Driving the point home!