Re:U.S. measles cases in 2013 may be most in 17 years
by fitzhume on Friday September 13, 2013 @12:50AM
(#6378722)
I agree that if medical treatment for measles was put in a more punitive price range (depending on vaccination status, and economic background of course), I could imagine a significant drop in people who choose not to vaccinate. Use that extra money to immunize people who actually want it, but can't pay for it. Use it for programs that teach about the dangers of letting your child go unvaccinated, both for them and for other children.
Re:U.S. measles cases in 2013 may be most in 17 years
by rdl on Friday September 13, 2013 @01:03AM
(#6378764)
The problem is the kind of fucktards who don't get their child vaccinated might then delay or avoid treatment of their highly contagious child...
Re:U.S. measles cases in 2013 may be most in 17 years
by noonespecial on Friday September 13, 2013 @01:09AM
(#6378779)
This is why this cost must be front-loaded. There should be a penalty paid when the vaccine is refused, much like the penalty we're contemplating now for people who refuse to enroll in the pending national health system. The logic would be the same. By refusing this preventative treatment, you're likely to incur a public cost in the future. We'd just like you to pay for that up front.
What gives a certain person the right to benefit from everyone else's vaccinations while refusing to subject their own children to the minimal risk? We don't need to prove that vaccines are "safe", just safer than a frikken measles epidemic... and then tax the snot out of everyone who choses to forgo that risk and expense by pushing it off onto others. Internalize that external cost and I bet you'll see a whole lot of zealotry dry right up in the cold face of monetary reality.