More Doctors 'Fire' Vaccine Refusers

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheTrueCentrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dale_M said:
Perhaps, but certainly they are a potential threat to infants or children who haven’t been fully vaccinated. And since there is a chance of encountering such in the patient waiting area, some doctors are reluctant to take the risk. The article mentions that was a major reason for one clinic to “fire” the families who refused to vaccinate.

Quoting from the article
Click to expand...
Oh please, I’m more at risk from the actual sick people there to see that Dr than some random unvaccinated kid there for a well child visit. The firings are nothing more than CYA and a way to get some people to comply.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Modern Medicine is more about money than it is about curing or preventing disease. The only science that matters to them in what improves the bottom line.
Click to expand...
Yes like how they have lowered the standard for considering someone to be diabetic or have high blood pressure or high cholesterol. That has resulted in a lot of people all of a sudden officially dx as having a disease and needing treatment.
 
I am more worried about my unvaccinated child getting something from some child in the waiting room than some other child getting something my child doesn’t have that the other child is already vaccinated for…if the other kids are vaccinated, then surely mine won’t infect them…
If a doctor refused my child treatment because they were not happy I did not continue with vaccines, then they would maybe not have to worry about legal issues, but they would have to account to the Lord.
 
I wouldn’t want my child to see a doctor who blindly enforces a vaccine schedule based on economics and convenience and doesn’t respect critical thinking. The US has the most packed schedule in the Western world. This isn’t about safety. It’s about blind comformity. Our intervention happy approach still doesn’t result in the outcomes the achieve in Europe, where kids do just fine without being vaxed for the chicken pox and having their genitals clamped at birth. Take a look at Iceland’s schedule. Going by the logic of somw US pediatricians it is a miracle most live past infancy:

euvac.net/graphics/euvac/vaccination/iceland.html
 
I think in a free society doctors should have the ability to fire patients they feel uncomfortable to work with, just as patients can leave and find new physicians to see.

What worries me is what choices will we have if Obamacare becomes law? I doubt seeing new doctors will be that easy, if even possible.

Already one of the bigger achilles heel to Obamacare will be a lack of primary physicians.

“Obamacare’s Achilles Heel: Primary Care Physicians”

blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/02/13/obamacares-achilles-heel-primary-care-physicians/
 
As usual these days, this issue is a minefield that must be walked carefully.

I agree that there are some vaccinations that are so fundamental to public health that they should be required for participation in the public square (schools, etc).

HOWEVER, I am seriously concerned about who judges which vaccines make that list and why. EVERY thing you inject has potential side effects, the risk of which should be weighed (even risks possilby not yet known). I see no reason for kids with a stay at home parent to get a chicken pox vaccine before hitting school age. I see so little disease risk for my little girls that they won’t be getting Gardisil anytime soon (I’m content you let you guys find out if there are long term side effects first).

I believe mandatory vaccines should be limited to truly serious public health threats ONLY.
 
SamTheNewfie said:
I wouldn’t want my child to see a doctor who blindly enforces a vaccine schedule based on economics and convenience and doesn’t respect critical thinking. The US has the most packed schedule in the Western world. This isn’t about safety. It’s about blind comformity. Our intervention happy approach still doesn’t result in the outcomes the achieve in Europe, where kids do just fine without being vaxed for the chicken pox and having their genitals clamped at birth. Take a look at Iceland’s schedule. Going by the logic of somw US pediatricians it is a miracle most live past infancy:

euvac.net/graphics/euvac/vaccination/iceland.html
Click to expand...
No, it is because choosing vaccines is the obvious correct choice. People are free to weigh the pros and cons, but a patient who tells doctors not to vaccinate his kids is clearly demonstration that “critical” is not an appropriate description of his thinking. Doctors simply do not wish to waste their time trying to convince someone who has demonstrated such a lack of reasoning ability.
 
Roselle said:
I think in a free society doctors should have the ability to fire patients they feel uncomfortable to work with, just as patients can leave and find new physicians to see.
Click to expand...
We are not all that free and we become less so every generation. Take the below situation:
Rich_Olszewski said:
Dale is correct. It usually involves a more serious medical condition. A lady friend of mine recovering from a broken hip is about to bring action against a surgeon who abandoned her because he didn’t like the way she spoke to his physician’s assistant!
Click to expand...
So apparently, doctors have to even take abuse without the basic freedom that most of us enjoy to not do a job we find distasteful.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
No, it is because choosing vaccines is the obvious correct choice.
Click to expand...
So Europeans are incorrect? The US is just smarter than the rest of the world, who are gambling with their children’s health by not protecting them from everything but the common cold? It’s a miracle that they have better health outcomes.
 
And we can’t forget those reckless Canadians who don’t vaccinate for an STD at birth.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
No, it is because choosing vaccines is the obvious correct choice. People are free to weigh the pros and cons, but a patient who tells doctors not to vaccinate his kids is clearly demonstration that “critical” is not an appropriate description of his thinking. Doctors simply do not wish to waste their time trying to convince someone who has demonstrated such a lack of reasoning ability.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that I have no reasoning ability because I saw my child have major effects from what I believe to be vaccine related and choose not to vaccinate her again until she is older? Is it obviously correct that I should risk my child’s life? Maybe you should walk a mile in my shoes before you condemn my decision…and offer to help me when she is sick…
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
No, it is because choosing vaccines is the obvious correct choice. People are free to weigh the pros and cons, but a patient who tells doctors not to vaccinate his kids is clearly demonstration that “critical” is not an appropriate description of his thinking. Doctors simply do not wish to waste their time trying to convince someone who has demonstrated such a lack of reasoning ability.
Click to expand...
It would seem to be the obvious correct choice if you have not informed yourself. If you spend any time studying the issue you’ll discover it is not so obvious. Maybe vaccines are always a great thing. Maybe taking too many too often is a problem. But I dont think it is always obviously the thing to do.

I believe the medical literature even says the vaccination against Chicken Pox is not 100% effective long term which is then less effective than natural exposure. And again I point to my contention that if all vaccines are great then hospitals would be bragging about how they’ve eliminated the flu. But anyone who pays attention to the flu vaccine knows that many years the medical community even admits its flu vaccine is ineffective against actual circulating strains. The funny thing is they still tell you to take that vaccine! Who doesn’t want spoilt inventory? I just dont see the need to dispose of it in my body.
 
rainbow1 said:
So are you saying that I have no reasoning ability because I saw my child have major effects from what I believe to be vaccine related and choose not to vaccinate her again until she is older? Is it obviously correct that I should risk my child’s life? Maybe you should walk a mile in my shoes before you condemn my decision…and offer to help me when she is sick…
Click to expand...
The only mechanism by which vaccines cause serious harm that I am aware of is the aggravation of certain (extremely) rare genetic disorders. If you believe a vaccine harmed your child, why not have them tested for these disorders? Unless you have more reasons than post hoc ergo propter hoc, I think refusing vaccines is being over-protective.
 
Are there no Catholic perspectives on this issue? All the posts so far could have been in any old forum. This issue involves love for neighbour (who may get infected if we do not vaccinate), parental responsibility for children, and balancing social and family risk against individual risk, to sat nothing of vaccination being pro-life! (And that’s from me, a non-believer!)
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
The only mechanism by which vaccines cause serious harm that I am aware of is the aggravation of certain (extremely) rare genetic disorders. If you believe a vaccine harmed your child, why not have them tested for these disorders? Unless you have more reasons than post hoc ergo propter hoc, I think refusing vaccines is being over-protective.
Click to expand...
SUPER! If you want people to inject substances into your body, feel free.
 
It is truly incompetant for parents to not have their children vaccinated.
 
exnihilo said:
It would seem to be the obvious correct choice if you have not informed yourself. If you spend any time studying the issue you’ll discover it is not so obvious. Maybe vaccines are always a great thing. Maybe taking too many too often is a problem. But I dont think it is always obviously the thing to do.
Click to expand...
If you claim to be informed, then why can you only offer “maybes?” The benefits of vaccination so far outweigh the risks that the decision is trivially easy. All “evidence” to the contrary comes from sources well known to be unreliable, biased, or easily frightened.
exnihilo said:
I believe the medical literature even says the vaccination against Chicken Pox is not 100% effective long term which is then less effective than natural exposure. And again I point to my contention that if all vaccines are great then hospitals would be bragging about how they’ve eliminated the flu. But anyone who pays attention to the flu vaccine knows that many years the medical community even admits its flu vaccine is ineffective against actual circulating strains. The funny thing is they still tell you to take that vaccine! Who doesn’t want spoilt inventory? I just dont see the need to dispose of it in my body.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spanish_flu_death_chart.png
People die from the flu. Sometimes a lot of people die. You are complaining about being inconvenienced. Sure, the flu vaccine isn’t perfect, nor is the chicken pox vaccine, but they are effective enough. Getting them literally saves lives, its too bad you find that distasteful.
 
SamTheNewfie said:
And we can’t forget those reckless Canadians who don’t vaccinate for an STD at birth.
Click to expand...
Not vaccinating for an STD is not such a serious issue. You can only get HPV of the cervix or penis or anus through sex. If you don’t have sex, you are not at risk. This is of course if you’re REALLY REALLY REALLY not having sex. Be honest here.
On the other hand, it’s much easier to contract mumps, measles or rubella. Those vaccines I feel should be adhered to. The risk : benefit ratio is heavily on the the benefit side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top