The value of immunization for the well-being of people can be underestimated. When people are vaccinated, they are not able to spread the disease to other members of the community. In the case when people are not vaccinated, outbreaks may happen. Nowadays, people’s opinions toward immunization practices have changed. This essay dwells on the reasons behind caregivers’ decision to delay immunization or refuse it. It also considers the ways medical professionals should communicate with patients regarding this issue.
After birth, processes of rapid neurological and physical development begin. This development is influenced by the surrounding environment and related experiences (Santrock, 2019). Parents’ concern for a child’s comprehensive development has led to the emergence of a new term – “vaccine hesitancy” (McKee & Bohannon, 2016). The survey conducted to find out the rationale for the vaccinations delay or refusal determined four categories of reasons (McKee & Bohannon, 2016).
These categories are religious arguments, personal beliefs, safety concerns, and a lack of information provided by healthcare professionals (McKee & Bohannon, 2016). There is no doubt that people are free to rely on their personal or religious beliefs. Some caregivers support the idea of natural immunity or “prefer to not put extra chemicals into their children’s bodies” (Saada et al., 2015). However, there are external factors that have an impact on vaccination refusal.
In the age of open information, it is getting harder to find credible sources of data. Mass media tends to present contradictory opinions about health issues to the public. It has been proved that people interpret messages based on their existing experience and knowledge (Qian et al., 2020). This cognitive distortion is called confirmatory bias, which does not allow recipients to change their position (Qian et al., 2020). For instance, the controversy about the link between the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autism guided public opinion even when the case had been proved groundless (Qian et al., 2020). Therefore, the role of a medical professional is to present coherent information about the benefits and consequences of immunization to caregivers.
I am convinced that caregivers need to be educated sufficiently and act without prejudice. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have various resources to assist caregivers as well as vaccination professionals. Medical doctors should be prepared to talk to parents about vaccines for infants (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018). If parents express concern, you need to give strong recommendations in favor of vaccination (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018).
According to CDC guidelines, caregivers have to be informed about potentially life-threatening diseases supported by real examples (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018). I believe it is crucial to understand the reasoning behind every concern and react to them. Due to the abundance of information, parents seek to get answers to topical questions from an educated professional. When parents and doctors reach an agreement, vaccine information statements and schedules are made available to ensure transparency.
The continuation of the conservation is necessary when parents refuse to proceed with vaccination. Besides, they need to understand possible risks and responsibilities. However, every conversation is a step forward, no matter how long it might take. There is always an opportunity to schedule another appointment and continue working. An array of supporting materials, such as parent’s guides, factsheets, vaccination schedules, and tips for a less stressful shot visit make the process smoother.
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2018). Talking with parents about vaccines for infants. Web.
McKee, C., & Bohannon, K. (2016). Exploring the reasons behind parental refusal of vaccines. Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 21(2), 104–109.
Qian, M., Chou, S.-Y., & Lai, E. K. (2020). Confirmatory bias in health decisions: Evidence from the MMR-autism controversy. Journal of Health Economics, 102284. Web.
Saada A., Lieu T., Morain, S., Zikmund-Fisher, B., & Wittenberg, E. (2015) Parents’ choices and rationales for alternative vaccination schedules: a qualitative study. Clinical Pediatrics, 54(3), 236–243.
Santrock, J. (2019). Life-span development (17th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.