Rabbi J. David Bleich Survey of Recent Halakhic Periodical Liturature Tradition Summer 2015 p55
[...]
Childhood vaccinations are not
accompanied by any significant danger. Despite widespread belief to the
contrary, autism is not at all associated with M.M.R. inoculation. That misinformation
gained currency and became widespread because of a spurious article based upon
fraudulent research that appeared in a British medical journal. The principal
author's malfeasance was subsequently exposed and his license to practice medicine
was revoked. Possible connections between autism and M.M.R vaccine were
rigorously investigated and in 2004, in a publication entitled "Immunization
Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism," the Institute of Medicine reported
that epidemiological evidence failed to establish a causal relationship. Other
dangers attendant upon various forms of inoculation are infinitesimal.28 The
dangers that do exist are well within the parameters of shomer peta'im as defined
by Binyan Zion. For Shem Aryeh and Imrei Shefer they are far below the
threshold level requiring even invocation of shomer peta'im.
Even assuming a higher degree of
danger, as earlier argued, a parent is nevertheless charged with assumption of
a minimal danger on behalf of a child in order to ward off more serious danger,
as evidenced by a father's obligation to teach his sons to swim.
Nor can the principle of shomer
peta'im be invoked to justify assumption of a recognized danger that can be
readily averted. That is clearly the import of the statement of R. Moshe
Feinstein, Iggerot Moshch, Even ha-Ezer, IV, no. 10, to the effect that, with
the development of blood tests to determine whether prospective marriage
partners are both carriers of the gene responsible for Tay-Sachs disease, one
may no longer rely upon shomer peta'im in assuming the risk of that disease.
For precisely the same reason, a danger posed by childhood disease tor which a
vaccine is available may not be assumed on the plea of shomer peta'im. That is
certainly the import of the statement attributed to the late R. Yosef Shalom
Eliashiv to the effect that "failure to immunize would amount to ncgligence.”
29
Perfection of vaccines that
immunize against disease results in a situation in which failure to vaccinate
is tantamount to willfully exposing oneself to Zi1'liWI ptihim, Once divine
providence has made a vaccine safely available, any misfortune resulting from
failing to avail oneself of immunization is to be attributed to human
negligence rather than to divine decree. Exposure to the disease without immunization
is equivalent to exposure to the elements without protection. Allowing a child
to be exposed to the ravages of communicable disease is no different from
exposing the child to zinim pahim. Any resultant harm is not at the hands of
Heaven but is derekh ikesh which the parent bears full responsibility. […]
Vaccination of one's children is
unquestionably a parental responsibility." Education of parents in their
halakhic responsibilities in light of the overwhelming benefits of vaccination
and their resultant voluntary compliance would entirely obviate the quandary
forced upon dedicated and well-meaning educators.
28 See the website tor the Center for Disease Control,
www.cdc.gov. See also, Alice Park, "How Safe Are Vaccines?" Time Magazine
,inc, June 2, 2008.
29 See Akiva Tatz, Dangerous Disease & Dangerous
Therapy in Jewish Medical Ethics, (Southfield, Michigan, 2010), p. 48.
No comments :
Post a Comment
ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.