Italian authorities are adjusting their approach to their mandatory vaccination rules, by removing the requirement for parents to submit a medical note confirming that their children have been vaccinated. From now on they say that they are simply going to take the parents word for it on whether the children have been vaccinated or not.
It's a different approach than authorities in other regions have been taking, as many areas have sought to introduce increasingly authoritarian vaccination orders.
In Australia for example, they are getting tougher on parents who don't choose to vaccinate their children, by moving to implement financial penalties to try and get them to change their mind. Dubbed the No Jab, No Pay policy, essentially they are lowering family tax benefits on a biweekly basis as long as the child has not met their vaccination requirements.
In Italy, parents there who don't comply with vaccine rules have faced a risk of being fined up to €500. And those in favor of the mandatory vaccinations have already raised concerns about the recent changes, suggesting that this will prompt a reduction in the compliance rate with immunizations in the country. The government has defended the move, insisting that this method will simplify the enrollment procedures in state-run schools.
Germany, France, the U.S. to some extent, and other areas, have also sought to make vaccinations mandatory for children. Supporters of this mandate in other areas that don't have such policies established, have also called for heavy penalties to be set for anyone who might object to the states' vaccine requirements.
The issue with these mandatory vaccination rules is that they establish with them an exception to the principle that parents should be the ones to make the health-care decisions for their own children, or that individuals should be able to make health-care decisions for themselves. And when we make the move to allow for such exceptions, it's a slippery-slope that can bring with it a myriad of other anti-liberty mandates in the future.
These vaccination mandates can also arguably encourage vaccine companies to try and influence political legislation that will result in more business; expanding the amount of vaccine mandates that there are.
Is force the only way to deal with this issue?
“Consistent application of the principles of private property, freedom of association, and individual responsibility is the best way to address concerns that those who refuse vaccines could infect others with disease.”
“The same principles that protect the right to refuse vaccines also protect the right of individuals to refuse to associate with the unvaccinated. Private property owners have the right to forbid those who reject vaccines from entering their property. This right extends to private businesses concerned that unvaccinated individuals could pose a risk to their employees and customers.” - Dr. Ron Paul.
Immunizations are an invasive procedure and they can impact individuals differently, some have had more negative experiences than others. Rallying the government to override the natural rights of individuals, to negate their consent and demand that they submit to their vaccination schedules, doesn't promote well-being for any individual.
If individuals are forced to have a medication injected into their body that they don't want, how is it that they are free? The principles of private property and freedom of association are sufficient to enable individuals to deal with the 'vaccine problem' in a peaceful way, rather than jumping to permit one more government intrusion into the lives of the people.
Pics:
Pic1 via NBC
Pic2 via NBC
