Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Rev. chil. pediatr ; 90(6): 675-682, dic. 2019. tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1058200

ABSTRACT

Resumen: Este artículo se presenta como una reflexión ética y jurídica acerca de la tendencia actual de los pa dres a rechazar la vacunación de sus hijos en un régimen jurídico que establece la obligatoriedad de determinadas vacunas. Se analizan los principales argumentos que los padres usan para rechazar las vacunaciones obligatorias, y, en concreto: el temor a los efectos negativos que la vacunación pueda provocar en el menor; la violación del "derecho a la autonomía"; las creencias religiosas o pseudo- filosóficas; la resistencia a la intervención del Estado en asuntos personales o familiares. De esto, nace un necesario análisis ético sobre la vacunación infantil. Finalmente, se discute la responsabilidad de los padres y del Estado (autoridad sanitaria) en el cuidado de los menores de edad. La vacunación es un beneficio tanto para el inoculado como para la comunidad, la mejor política preventiva. Al mismo tiempo, se configura como un caso complejo que demanda un debate profundo, cuyo fin debe ser el tránsito desde un aparente conflicto entre los padres y el Estado, a una convergencia por el cuidado de los menores de edad. En otros términos, se recalca el hecho de que los padres, más allá del cum plimiento de un deber normativo heterogéneo, deben actuar motivados por la adhesión voluntaria al bien del hijo y de la comunidad.


Abstract: This article is an ethical and legal reflection about the current trend of parents to refuse vaccination of their children under a legal regime that establishes mandatory use of certain vaccines. We analyze the main arguments used by parents to refuse obligatory vaccination, i.e., the fear of the negative effects that vaccination may have on the child; the violation of the "right to autonomy"; religious or pseudo-philosophical beliefs; and the resistance to the State intervention in personal or family mat ters. Therefore, this statement implies a necessary ethical analysis of childhood vaccination. Finally, it will be discussed the responsibility of parents and the State -the health authority- in the care of mi nors. Vaccination is a benefit for both the inoculated and the community, the best preventive policy. At the same time, it is considered a complex case that demands a profound debate, whose purpose should be the transition from an apparent conflict between parents and the State, to convergence for the care of minors. In other words, it is emphasized the fact that parents, beyond the fulfillment of a heterogeneous normative duty, must act motivated by voluntary adherence to the best interest of the child and the community.


Subject(s)
Humans , Mandatory Programs/legislation & jurisprudence , Mandatory Programs/ethics , Vaccination Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Vaccination Refusal/ethics , Parents , Philosophy , Religion , Chile , Personal Autonomy , Government Regulation , Anti-Vaccination Movement
2.
Rev. chil. pediatr ; 90(5): 559-562, oct. 2019.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1058184

ABSTRACT

Resumen: A pesar del enorme impacto de las vacunas en la salud de la población, estas han sido y son objeto de cuestionamientos por grupos que las consideran innecesarias o inseguras y argumentan que las personas tienen el derecho a decidir sobre si estas deben ser administradas o no. Sin embargo el uso de vacunas tiene connotaciones distintas a otras decisiones en salud, ya que no vacunar impacta no solo al individuo, sino también a la comunidad que lo rodea. El inmunizar a un alto porcentaje de la población permite limitar la circulación de los agentes infecciosos, logrando la llamada inmunidad comunitaria que protege a los no vacunados por razones médicas o porque son muy pequeños. Por esta razón muchos países han definido las vacunas como obligatorias. Como Comité Consultivo de Inmunizaciones nos parece que esta estrategia es correcta sin embargo debe ser acompañada por una política de educación de la población y personal de salud sobre los beneficios y riesgos reales de las va cunas. Así mismo es necesario introducir mejoras en el sistema de notificación de reacciones adversas a vacunas haciéndolo más accesible. Adicionalmente se debe dar respuesta oportuna a los afectados por supuestas o reales reacciones a vacunas y en los casos de eventos adversos graves efectivamente asociados a vacunas. Entregar cobertura económica y acompañamiento. Finalmente es esencial la coordinación entre los diferentes actores y comunicadores para transmitir mensajes que generen confianza y respondan a las inquietudes de la población de hoy en día.


Abstract: Although vaccines have had a tremendous impact in public health they are questioned by certain groups that consider them unnecessary or unsafe and argue in favor of the right to decide to be vacci nated or not. However vaccines must have special considerations because unlike other medical deci sions, not vaccinating has consequences not only for the individual but also for other members of the community. Immunizing a high proportion of the population limits the circulation of an infectious agent attaining what is called community or herd immunity that protects the susceptible members of the group. For this reason many countries consider vaccination mandatory as a responsibility of every citizen. This committee agrees with this view but thinks other strategies should be implemented as well, such as special educational efforts for the public and parents addressing benefits and real risks of vaccinating. Also health care professionals should be trained in vaccines. The notification system for adverse events currently available should be improved and be more accessible. Persons truly affected by adverse events due to vaccination should receive on time responses and be offered psychological and financial support. Finally all stakeholders should make coordinated efforts to work together to deliver messages that answer concerns on vaccines and bring confidence back to the public.


Subject(s)
Humans , Vaccines/administration & dosage , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Refusal/psychology , Health Policy , Parents/psychology , Chile , Public Health , Health Education/methods , Vaccination/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Personnel/organization & administration , Immunity, Herd , Vaccination Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence
3.
Rev. Paul. Pediatr. (Ed. Port., Online) ; 37(1): 34-40, Jan.-Mar. 2019. tab
Article in Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-985122

ABSTRACT

RESUMO Objetivo: Identificar a percepção da importância das vacinas e os riscos da recusa vacinal entre alunos de Medicina e médicos. Métodos: Estudo transversal realizado por meio da aplicação de questionários sobre vacinas, recusa vacinal e suas repercussões acerca da saúde pública e individual. A amostra, de 92 sujeitos, foi selecionada numa escola privada de Medicina: grupo 1 (53 estudantes do primeiro ao quarto ano) e grupo 2 (39 médicos). Os dados colhidos foram tabulados no programa Microsoft Excel e analisados estatisticamente com o teste exato de Fisher. Resultados: Os dois grupos consideram o Programa Nacional de Imunizações confiável e reconhecem a importância das vacinas, mas 64,2% dos estudantes e 38,5% dos médicos desconhecem o número de doenças infecciosas evitáveis pelas vacinas no calendário básico. A maioria dos entrevistados possuía carteira de vacinas, mas nem todos receberam vacina influenza 2015. Conheciam pessoas que recusavam vacinas e/ou recusavam vacinar seus filhos (respectivamente, 54,7 e 43,3% dos estudantes e 59,0 e 41,0% dos médicos). Dos médicos, 48,7% já atenderam pacientes que se recusaram a receber vacinas. Consideram causas de recusa vacinal: medo de eventos adversos, razões filosóficas, religiosas e desconhecimento sobre gravidade e frequência das doenças. Aspectos éticos da recusa vacinal e possibilidades legais de exigir vacinas para crianças não são consenso. Conclusões: Alunos de Medicina e médicos não se vacinam adequadamente, apresentam dúvidas sobre calendário vacinal, segurança das vacinas e recusa vacinal. Melhorar sua capacitação é importante estratégia para manter as coberturas vacinais e abordar a recusa vacinal de forma ética.


ABSTRACT Objective: To identify the perception of medical students and physicians on the importance of vaccination and the risks of vaccine refusal. Methods: Cross-sectional study with application of questionnaires about vaccines, vaccine refusal and its repercussions on public and individual health. A sample of 92 subjects was selected from a private medical school: group 1 (53 students from first to fourth grades) and group 2 (39 physicians). Data collected were tabulated in the Microsoft Excel Program and analyzed by Fisher's exact test. Results: Both groups considered the National Immunization Program reliable and recognized the importance of vaccines, but 64.2% of students and 38.5% of physicians are unaware of the vaccine-preventable infectious diseases in the basic immunization schedule. Most of the interviewees had a personal vaccine registry, but not all had received the 2015 influenza vaccine. Both groups had known people who refused vaccines for themselves or for their children (respectively, 54.7 and 43.3% of students and 59.0 and 41.0% of physicians). The total of 48.7% of physicians had already assisted vaccine refusers. Appointed causes of vaccine refusal were: fear of adverse events, philosophical and religious reasons and lack of knowledge about severity and frequency of diseases. Ethical aspects of vaccine refusal and legal possibilities of vaccine requirements for children are not consensus. Conclusions: Medical students and doctors are not adequately vaccinated and have queries about the vaccination schedule, vaccine safety and vaccine refusal. Improving these professionals' knowledge is an important strategy to maintain vaccine coverage and address vaccine refusal ethically.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Attitude of Health Personnel , Vaccination/psychology , Physicians/psychology , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Students, Medical/psychology , Students, Medical/statistics & numerical data , Brazil , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Cross-Sectional Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Vaccination Refusal/psychology , Vaccination Refusal/ethics
4.
Rev. chil. infectol ; 34(6): 583-586, dic. 2017.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-899763

ABSTRACT

Resumen A pesar del enorme impacto de las vacunas en la salud de la población, éstas han sido y son objeto de cuestionamientos por grupos que las consideran innecesarias o inseguras y argumentan que las personas tienen el derecho a decidir sobre si éstas deben ser administradas o no. Sin embargo, el uso de vacunas tiene connotaciones distintas a otras decisiones en salud, ya que no vacunar impacta no sólo al individuo, sino también a la comunidad que lo rodea. El inmunizar a un alto porcentaje de la población permite limitar la circulación de los agentes infecciosos, logrando la llamada inmunidad comunitaria que protege a los no vacunados por razones médicas o porque son muy pequeños. Por esta razón muchos países han definido las vacunas como obligatorias. Como Comité Consultivo de Inmunizaciones nos parece que esta estrategia es correcta; sin embargo, debe ser acompañada por una política de educación de la población y personal de salud sobre los beneficios y riesgos reales de las vacunas. Así mismo es necesario introducir mejoras en el sistema de notificación de reacciones adversas a vacunas haciéndolo más accesible. Adicionalmente, se debe dar respuesta oportuna a los afectados por supuestas o reales reacciones a vacunas, y en los casos de eventos adversos graves efectivamente asociados a vacunas. entregar cobertura económica y acompañamiento. Finalmente, es esencial la coordinación entre los diferentes actores y comunicadores para transmitir mensajes que generen confianza y respondan a las inquietudes de la población de hoy en día.


Although vaccines have had a tremendous impact in public health they are questioned by certain groups that consider them unnecessary or unsafe and argue in favor of the right to decide to be vaccinated or not. However vaccines must have special considerations because unlike other medical decisions, not vaccinating has consequences not only for the individual but also for other members of the community. Immunizing a high proportion of the population limits the circulation of an infectious agent attaining what is called herd immunity that protects the susceptible members of the group. For this reason many countries consider vaccination mandatory as a responsibility of every citizen. This committee agrees with this view but thinks other strategies should be implemented as well, such as special educational efforts for the public and parents addressing benefits and real risks of vaccinating. Also health care professionals should be trained in vaccines. The notification system for adverse events currently available should be improved and be more accessible. Persons truly affected by adverse events due to vaccination should receive on time responses and be offered psychological and financial support. Finally all stakeholders should make coordinated efforts to work together to deliver messages that answer concerns on vaccines and bring confidence back to the public.


Subject(s)
Humans , Societies, Medical , Vaccination/standards , Immunization Programs/standards , Mandatory Programs/standards , Vaccination Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Chile , Communicable Disease Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Risk Factors , Vaccination/legislation & jurisprudence , Immunization Programs/legislation & jurisprudence , Mandatory Programs/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Policy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL