Home > Free Essays > Law > Health Law > Vaccination’ Arguments and Ethics

Vaccination’ Arguments and Ethics Research Paper

Exclusively available on IvyPanda Available only on IvyPanda
Updated: May 5th, 2020

The question on whether parents should be presented with the duty of ensuring that their children are vaccinated depends on evaluating the liberal and security elements on the philosophical ideology modeled by Deborah Stones while conducting an analysis of works by Lantos et al. and Kirkland.

While maintaining focus on different elements of the ideology, it will be imperative to evaluate the extent to which the ideology may help in the realization of a legally viable system of an argument with regard to the negligence where a parent fails to observe the vaccination requirements.

The evaluation process will incorporate the contemporary measles crisis that has affected some regions of the country. While analyzing the elements in Stone’s paradox policy, it will be imperative to understand the mode through which the policy supports or opposes the works by the Lantos and other researchers that have focused their subjects on vaccinations (Stone).

The policy paradox has three elements that act as the foundation of the rationale (Stone). The reasoning elements develop a focus on means through which individuals observe issues in a variety of perspectives while aiming at understanding the actual state of these issues. The element of the society focuses on explaining the uniformity in the aspirations or goals of individuals within society. The element of policy analyses the modes of struggles over ideologies.

Stone maintains that society has subjects that have common interests and that the interests are aimed at benefiting the general community rather than serving individualistic needs (Stone). The philosophy maintains that there should be concentric goals and views among members of the society on issues that are beneficial to society.

Stone argues that influences provide an important element in affecting the outcome of goals within the community. The ideology maintains that individuals are part of institutions, and the policies made by these institutions are meant to solve public challenges (Stone). The ability of individuals within a community to share meanings on different subjects creates a basis for motivating individuals to embrace collective means of making decisions.

The political challenges have some level of influence on ideas, and policymaking is a regular effort regarding the model for categorizing and classifying behaviors. Policies provide the basis for goal-making, and goals provide means of assessing the variations in the standards of programs. The liberty principle asserts that individuals should be given the freedom to choose actions, but the actions should not cause harm to others and the community.

The study of Lantos et al. and Kirkland presents a number of elements regarding the issue of vaccination (Lantos). The researchers maintain that the policies that guide the immunization have been characterized by controversies that vary within different contexts. The immunizations of children have caused fear among parents due to the perceived side effects that result from immunizations. The rate of concern among parents has been known to increase with routinely conducted immunizations on children.

The uncertainty in understanding the essence of immunization has resulted in a decrease in the number of immunized children. The policies that guide the immunization process should be well defined to the public before the public is immunized (Lantos).

The arguments developed by the researchers assert that institutions play a vital role in determining the immunization process, and health institutions should adopt the mandate of ensuring that health workers are immunized as a means of ensuring that clients and other workers in a healthcare system are protected. The researchers maintain that the health officials that refuse vaccinations are breaching their moral mandate of protecting workers and clients within the healthcare system.

Alluding to the liberty principle, the government has a mandate of implementing the immunization policy unless the policy is harmful. As much as parents may have a right to prevent the immunization of their children, the state has the overall mandate of ensuring that children are immunized. The immunization ensures that the individual lives and society are protected from a disease that is contagious (Fisher).

According to the liberal paradox policy, an institution has a mandate of ensuring that each student is protected against harm that may result from contracting a disease that is contagious. Alluding to the security principle, the immunization process presents the easiest means of managing the crisis of the health crisis.

According to Lantos et al. and Kirkland, institutions have a role to play in ensuring that every member of the institution is protected from harm (Lantos). While students in an institution have their individual learning rights, the institution should adopt policies that protect each student from harm (Fisher). The institution may consider barring students that are not vaccinated, and there should be no exception.

The current measles problem in the country presents a challenge to the government. The treatment process has proven more expensive, and it has led to the diversion of efforts from urgent healthcare issues. The epidemic has kept the affected students from classes. Without proper measures, containing the epidemic may present a challenge to the government (Berlinger).

The state should mandate parents and institutions to have students immunized as a means of ensuring that there are reduced cases of spread of measles. The state is justified to take legal action against parents that refuses to have their children immunized. The legal action will have ethical viability where the parents have been notified prior to conducting the immunization.

Works Cited

Berlinger, Nancy. ‘Conscience Clauses, Health Care Providers, And Parents – The Hastings Center’. Thehastingscenter.org. N.p., 2015. Web.

Fisher, Barbara. ‘The Moral Right To Conscientious, Personal Belief Or Philosophical Exemption To Mandatory Vaccination Laws’. National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). N.p., 2015. Web.

Lantos, et al. ‘Controversies In Vaccine Mandates. – Pubmed – NCBI’. Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. N.p., 2015. Web.

Stone, Deborah. ‘Review Of Policy Paradox’. Think A Bit. N.p., 2015. Web.

This research paper on Vaccination’ Arguments and Ethics was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
Removal Request
If you are the copyright owner of this paper and no longer wish to have your work published on IvyPanda.
Request the removal

Need a custom Research Paper sample written from scratch by
professional specifically for you?

801 certified writers online

Cite This paper
Select a referencing style:


IvyPanda. (2020, May 5). Vaccination' Arguments and Ethics. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccination-arguments-and-ethics/


IvyPanda. (2020, May 5). Vaccination' Arguments and Ethics. Retrieved from https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccination-arguments-and-ethics/

Work Cited

"Vaccination' Arguments and Ethics." IvyPanda, 5 May 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/vaccination-arguments-and-ethics/.

1. IvyPanda. "Vaccination' Arguments and Ethics." May 5, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccination-arguments-and-ethics/.


IvyPanda. "Vaccination' Arguments and Ethics." May 5, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccination-arguments-and-ethics/.


IvyPanda. 2020. "Vaccination' Arguments and Ethics." May 5, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/vaccination-arguments-and-ethics/.


IvyPanda. (2020) 'Vaccination' Arguments and Ethics'. 5 May.

Powered by CiteTotal, best referencing maker
More related papers