No more kidding around

restructuring non-medical childhood immunization exemptions to ensure public health protection.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Professor Silverman's article examines the complex challenges faced by U.S. policymakers attempting to balance the public health protections of mandatory childhood immunization programs with the legal, religious, philosophical, and practical concerns raised by permitting non-medical exemptions under the programs. The article begins with a discussion of the history of childhood immunization programs, and continues by describing the inconsistency of enforcement of state immunization laws and exemptions. The author analyzes recent cases from New York, Wyoming, and Arkansas, and discusses how these decisions both pose threats to these programs' public health protections, while also offering insight into potential problems for other state vaccination programs. Professor Silverman concludes by advocating that states adopt an "informed refusal" approach to vaccination exemption as a way of improving immunity protections, while respecting the autonomy rights of those who wish to opt out of the program.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAnnals of health law / Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, Institute for Health Law
Volume12
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jan 1 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Immunization Programs
Immunization
Vaccination
Public Health
Immunity
History

Cite this

@article{ee17e21e84f7446cba961e2531e5300a,
title = "No more kidding around: restructuring non-medical childhood immunization exemptions to ensure public health protection.",
abstract = "Professor Silverman's article examines the complex challenges faced by U.S. policymakers attempting to balance the public health protections of mandatory childhood immunization programs with the legal, religious, philosophical, and practical concerns raised by permitting non-medical exemptions under the programs. The article begins with a discussion of the history of childhood immunization programs, and continues by describing the inconsistency of enforcement of state immunization laws and exemptions. The author analyzes recent cases from New York, Wyoming, and Arkansas, and discusses how these decisions both pose threats to these programs' public health protections, while also offering insight into potential problems for other state vaccination programs. Professor Silverman concludes by advocating that states adopt an {"}informed refusal{"} approach to vaccination exemption as a way of improving immunity protections, while respecting the autonomy rights of those who wish to opt out of the program.",
author = "Ross Silverman",
year = "2003",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
journal = "Annals of health law / Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, Institute for Health Law",
issn = "1075-2994",
publisher = "Loyola University Chicago Law Journal",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - No more kidding around

T2 - restructuring non-medical childhood immunization exemptions to ensure public health protection.

AU - Silverman, Ross

PY - 2003/1/1

Y1 - 2003/1/1

N2 - Professor Silverman's article examines the complex challenges faced by U.S. policymakers attempting to balance the public health protections of mandatory childhood immunization programs with the legal, religious, philosophical, and practical concerns raised by permitting non-medical exemptions under the programs. The article begins with a discussion of the history of childhood immunization programs, and continues by describing the inconsistency of enforcement of state immunization laws and exemptions. The author analyzes recent cases from New York, Wyoming, and Arkansas, and discusses how these decisions both pose threats to these programs' public health protections, while also offering insight into potential problems for other state vaccination programs. Professor Silverman concludes by advocating that states adopt an "informed refusal" approach to vaccination exemption as a way of improving immunity protections, while respecting the autonomy rights of those who wish to opt out of the program.

AB - Professor Silverman's article examines the complex challenges faced by U.S. policymakers attempting to balance the public health protections of mandatory childhood immunization programs with the legal, religious, philosophical, and practical concerns raised by permitting non-medical exemptions under the programs. The article begins with a discussion of the history of childhood immunization programs, and continues by describing the inconsistency of enforcement of state immunization laws and exemptions. The author analyzes recent cases from New York, Wyoming, and Arkansas, and discusses how these decisions both pose threats to these programs' public health protections, while also offering insight into potential problems for other state vaccination programs. Professor Silverman concludes by advocating that states adopt an "informed refusal" approach to vaccination exemption as a way of improving immunity protections, while respecting the autonomy rights of those who wish to opt out of the program.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0041510446&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0041510446&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 12

JO - Annals of health law / Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, Institute for Health Law

JF - Annals of health law / Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, Institute for Health Law

SN - 1075-2994

IS - 2

ER -