Anti-Vaccine Parents Found Guilty In Death Of Their Toddler (generation, ethics, attorney)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How does this go from talking about the case in Canada which was not a vaccine issue to talking about ALL vaccines in general? The case had to do with whether the parents failed to seek treatment quick enough. The two expert medical examiners disagreed on the cause of death so really, trying to make this into a vaccine issue is nothing short of desperation to shift the focus of the case to something that it was not. It was strictly to decide whether or not the parents failed to take him to a doctor soon enough. That was what the jury was tasked with deciding and they decided that they were guilty. Based on what I've read regarding the case I would have had a very hard time deciding guilt or innocence in this case. Sad all around.
Except that in Europe and most of Asia they break up the MMR vaccine into two to three doses. Here it's only available in one dose because it's more profitable for the drug companies that way. Makes you wonder why they break it up elsewhere...
The MMR is given in two separate doses, at least four weeks apart, here in the US.
Quote:
Measles is the most deadly of all childhood rash/fever illnesses. The disease spreads very easily, so it is important to protect against infection. To prevent measles, children (and some adults) should be vaccinated with the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Two doses of this vaccine are needed for complete protection. Children should be given the first dose of MMR vaccine at 12 to 15 months of age. The second dose can be given 4 weeks later, but is usually given before the start of kindergarten at 4 to 6 years of age.
How does this go from talking about the case in Canada which was not a vaccine issue to talking about ALL vaccines in general? The case had to do with whether the parents failed to seek treatment quick enough. The two expert medical examiners disagreed on the cause of death so really, trying to make this into a vaccine issue is nothing short of desperation to shift the focus of the case to something that it was not. It was strictly to decide whether or not the parents failed to take him to a doctor soon enough. That was what the jury was tasked with deciding and they decided that they were guilty. Based on what I've read regarding the case I would have had a very hard time deciding guilt or innocence in this case. Sad all around.
That child would not have fallen ill with bacterial meningitis had his parents gotten him the vaccination.
Quote:
Meningococcal meningitis is a serious disease -- even with treatment. That's why prevention is a far better approach. The meningococcal vaccine can prevent meningitis infection.
How would a mother explain to her adult daughter, who is dying from cervical cancer, why she decided not to vaccinate her against HPV when she was a young teen?
Why didn't adult daughter (19-26?) go out and get the vaccination herself if Mom didn't vaccinate her as a teen? If adult dying daughter is in her 30's, it did not exist when she was a teen.
This is in Canada so really, I don't have much say. I will say that if I was on a jury here I would not have found for guilt. At least not jail time.
They were doing what they believed to be best. They had no intentions of harm.
If a doctor had been treating the kid and did what he thought was best, even if he made an error and that treatment lead to a babies death we do not send them to jail.
They didn't bother to take their ill child to a doctor despite his being sick for two weeks, and when a friend who was an RN told them that she thought the toddler had meningitis, they still treated him with herbs instead of taking him to a doctor. They didn't bother to call for any professional medical help for their son until he stopped breathing! That's criminally negligent homicide IMO. It's NOT like they're uneducated immigrants from some Third World backwater where people rely on folk medicine because they don't know any better.
This isn't about them being anti-vaxxers, either. It's about them failing to get medical help for their son and causing his death when he could very well have been saved if they had acted like responsible adults.
How does this go from talking about the case in Canada which was not a vaccine issue to talking about ALL vaccines in general? The case had to do with whether the parents failed to seek treatment quick enough. The two expert medical examiners disagreed on the cause of death so really, trying to make this into a vaccine issue is nothing short of desperation to shift the focus of the case to something that it was not. It was strictly to decide whether or not the parents failed to take him to a doctor soon enough. That was what the jury was tasked with deciding and they decided that they were guilty. Based on what I've read regarding the case I would have had a very hard time deciding guilt or innocence in this case. Sad all around.
There are many poster on here who seem to think that any parent, or for that matter even adults, who do not get their vaccinations, should be prosecuted purely from that fact alone; whether that child get sick or not.
There are plenty of illnesses a child can get for which there is NO vaccine at all. Strep is one. However, once the child is very, very ill and the parents do not seek immediate medical attention, that is where the Negligence factor comes in. It is not the vaccinated status, but what happened after the fact.
Should parents also be prosecuted for not giving their children (and themselves) Flu shots too? Plenty don't. If the child only has mild symptoms, should parents be charged also for not seeking medical care? There is a MAJOR difference if that "unvaccinated" child has a very high temperature, having convulsions, and the parents do not seek medical treatment immediately. It is not the Negligence for refusing the Flu Shot, but refusing medical treatment afterwards.
There have been a few lawsuits with "Vegan" mothers giving their babies vegetable concoctions where babies have died. Should they have been prosecuted for not Breastfeeding them? Of course, not. Should they have been prosecuted for not giving them Cow's Milk Formula. Again, NO. Soy Formulas are a perfectly acceptable and safe alternative. The "woo" alternative which will not kill that infant.
Here is one for Suzy Q, If a pregnant woman refuses to get a Tdap (less than 50% do today), does not demand that every person who comes into with her Newborn gets a Tdap (do that HOW?), should she be prosecuted for refusing Tdap herself if her Newborn catches Whooping Cough and dies. Should every unvaccinated person who came into contact with that Newborn also be prosecuted? I would say No, UNLESS that Newborn's Mother does not seek medical treatment for her baby with Whooping Cough right away.
It is the AFTER the fact for which these prosecutions occur, not the BEFORE the fact.
That child would not have fallen ill with bacterial meningitis had his parents gotten him the vaccination.
The bacteria was hemophilus influenzae B. The meningococcus usually strikes an older age group.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
Why didn't adult daughter (19-26?) go out and get the vaccination herself if Mom didn't vaccinate her as a teen? If adult dying daughter is in her 30's, it did not exist when she was a teen.
At least know the timeline of these vaccines.
It was a hypothetical situation, no timeline involved.
Bacterial meningitis was not 100% confirmed by autopsy. The Former Chief Medical Examiner testified and stated that she thought viral meningitis was much more likely then bacterial based on the symptoms and the autopsy report. The experts disagreed. So no, vaccines are not the issue in this case. The case is about whether or not the parents sought care early enough.
The bacteria was hemophilus influenzae B. The meningococcus usually strikes an older age group.
It was a hypothetical situation, no timeline involved.
It goes to the "mindset" not the reality of the situation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
