Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Free to Choose but Liable for the Consequences: Should Non-Vaccinators Be Penalized for the Harm They Do?Arthur L. Caplan, David Hoke, Nicholas J. Diamond & Viktoriya Karshenboyem - 2012 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (3):606-611.
    Can parents who choose not to vaccinate their children be held legally liable for any harm that results? The state of laboratory and epidemiological understanding of a disease such as measles makes it likely that a persuasive causal link can be established between a decision to not vaccinate, a failure to take appropriate precautions to isolate a non-vaccinated child who may have been exposed to measles from highly vulnerable persons, and a death. This paper argues that, even if a parent (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Free to Choose but Liable for the Consequences: Should Non-Vaccinators Be Penalized for the Harm They Do?Arthur L. Caplan, David Hoke, Nicholas J. Diamond & Viktoriya Karshenboyem - 2012 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (3):606-611.
    Consider this hypothetical scenario involving a choice not to vaccinate a child. Ms. S has a niece who is autistic. The girl's parents are suspicious that there is some relationship between her autism and her Measles Mumps and Rubella vaccination. They have shared their concerns with Ms. S. She then declines to have her own daughter, Jinny S., vaccinated with the MMR vaccine. To bypass the state's mandatory vaccination requirement, Ms. S claims a state-legislated philosophical exemption, whereby she simply attests (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations