Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 27
Filtrar
4.
J Pediatr ; 231: 17-23, 2021 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33484695

RESUMO

Mandatory school vaccination policies with exclusion of unvaccinated students can be a powerful tool in ensuring high vaccination rates. Some parents may object to mandatory vaccination policies, claiming exemptions based on medical, religious, or philosophical reasons. Individual schools, school systems, or local or regional governments have different policies with respect to whether, and what kind of, exemptions may be allowed. In the setting of the current pandemic, questions regarding the acceptability of exemptions have resurfaced, as schools and local governments struggle with how to safely return children to school. Anticipating that school attendance will be facilitated by the development of a vaccine, school systems will face decisions about whether to mandate vaccination and whether to permit exemptions. The American Academy of Pediatrics promulgates policy favoring the elimination of nonmedical exemptions generally in schools. This discussion considers whether schools should eliminate nonmedical exemptions to vaccination as proposed in the American Academy of Pediatrics policy, ultimately concluding that broad elimination of exemptions is not justified and advocating a more nuanced approach that encourages school attendance while promoting vaccination and broader public health goals.


Assuntos
Política de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Programas de Imunização/ética , Instituições Acadêmicas/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Vacinação/ética , Adolescente , Atitude Frente a Saúde , Criança , Humanos , Programas de Imunização/legislação & jurisprudência , Pais , Instituições Acadêmicas/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados Unidos , Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa de Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência
7.
Pediatrics ; 146(4)2020 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32994179

RESUMO

Parents in the United States have a legal right to refuse vaccination for their children. There are, however, special circumstances under which the state may compel vaccination against parental wishes. In this Ethics Rounds article, we present the case of a young boy with sickle cell disease who was partially vaccinated against encapsulated bacteria and the ethics of whether to compel complete vaccination before splenectomy.


Assuntos
Anemia Falciforme/terapia , Consultoria Ética , Relações Profissional-Família , Esplenectomia , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Antibioticoprofilaxia , Serviços de Proteção Infantil , Pré-Escolar , Transfusão de Eritrócitos , Humanos , Hospedeiro Imunocomprometido , Masculino , Infecções Oportunistas , Transferência de Pacientes , Recusa do Paciente ao Tratamento , Confiança
10.
Rev. cuba. med. trop ; 71(3): e394, sept.-dic. 2019. tab, graf
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS, CUMED | ID: biblio-1093580

RESUMO

Objetivo: conocer desde la perspectiva social, los conocimientos y creencias de la población a partir del significado que las personas le atribuyen a las vacunas preventivas y al proceso de vacunación. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio exploratorio con familiares de niños de 0 a 24 meses pertenecientes al Policlínico 5 de Septiembre, municipio Playa, La Habana, que abarcó de enero a junio de 2015. Se utilizó un diseño mixto convergente o por triangulación de datos. Para la recolección de datos se utilizó la entrevista-cuestionario, entrevista a expertos y entrevista a informantes claves. Se elaboró una base de datos en Excel, la que se exportó al programa SPSS versión 19.0. En un primer momento, se realizó un análisis descriptivo, en el que se calcularon frecuencias absolutas y relativas para las variables de estudio. Para establecer las relaciones entre el nivel de conocimiento y algunas variables sociodemográficas, para el análisis de los datos cualitativos, se realizaron lecturas reiteradas de las transcripciones de las entrevistas a expertos e informantes claves y de las respuestas a las preguntas abiertas del cuestionario para la familiarización con el contenido de estos. Resultados: Se puso de manifiesto la vía institucional en la cultura de la salud que poseen los familiares con relación a las vacunas y el proceso de vacunación. Los familiares presentaban en su mayoría conocimientos insuficientes acerca de las vacunas y las enfermedades que protegen estas. No presentaban conocimientos sobre los eventos adversos graves o severos. El proceso de vacunación mostró gran significado para los familiares, asociados a experiencias positivas con este. Conclusiones: Se inicia un acercamiento a la cultura de la salud, poseída por un grupo de familiares, relativos a las vacunas preventivas y el proceso de vacunación en Cuba. Las madres refuerzan la responsabilidad de vacunar al niño/a como parte del cuidado de la salud de este. La cultura de la salud en los familiares de niños/as no incluye información distorsionada sobre las vacunas preventivas y su efectividad. Se nutre exclusivamente de la cultura científica, aunque no la reproduce en su totalidad. El proceso de vacunación es altamente valorado por los familiares, dada la importancia que le atribuyen, la confianza que tienen en el Programa Nacional de Inmunización, la satisfacción que muestran con la organización del servicio y la atención del personal de salud(AU)


Objective: to know, from the social perspective, the population´s knowledge and beliefs based on the meaning that people attribute to preventive vaccines and the vaccination process. Methods: An exploratory study was carried out with relatives of children from 0 to 24 months from "5 de Septiembre" community clinic in Playa municipality, Havana, from January to June 2015. A mixed convergent or triangulation design was used. Data collection was completed by questionnaire interview, expert interview and interview to key informants. A database was created in Excel, which was exported to the SPSS program version 19.0. Initially, a descriptive analysis was performed, in which absolute and relative frequencies were calculated for the study variables. Repeated readings were made of the transcripts of the interviews with experts and key informants and for the answers to the open questions of the questionnaire, to establish the analysis of the qualitative data, and for familiarization with their content. Results: It was shown the institutional pathway in health culture that family members have in relation to vaccines and the vaccination process. Most family members had poor knowledge about vaccines and the diseases they prevent. They did not show knowledge about serious or severe adverse events. The vaccination process showed great significance for family members, associated with positive experiences with it. Conclusions: This study initiates an approach to the health culture a group of family members had related to preventive vaccines and the vaccination process in Cuba. Mothers reinforce the responsibility of vaccinating the child as part of their child's health care. The health culture in family members of children does not include distorted information about preventive vaccines and their effectiveness. Their knowledge is fed exclusively by scientific culture, although it is entirety not reproduce. The vaccination process is highly valued by family members, given the importance they attach to it, the confidence they have in the National Immunization Program, the satisfaction they show with the organization of the service and the care of health personnel(AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Programas de Imunização/métodos , Letramento em Saúde/ética , Educação da População , Recusa de Vacinação/ética
11.
Rev. chil. pediatr ; 90(6): 675-682, dic. 2019. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS | ID: biblio-1058200

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Humanos , Programas Obrigatórios/legislação & jurisprudência , Programas Obrigatórios/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Pais , Filosofia , Religião , Chile , Autonomia Pessoal , Regulamentação Governamental , Movimento contra Vacinação
12.
J Med Ethics ; 45(8): 552-555, 2019 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31249107

RESUMO

Recent reports in Australia have suggested that some medical practitioners are refusing to treat children who have not been vaccinated, a practice that has been observed in the USA and parts of Europe for some years. This behaviour, if it is indeed occurring in Australia, has not been supported by the Australian Medical Association, although there is broad support for medical practitioners in general having the right to conscientious objection. This paper examines the ethical underpinnings of conscientious objection and whether the right to conscientious objection can be applied to the refusal to treat unvaccinated children. The implications of such a decision will also be discussed, to assess whether refusal to treat unvaccinated children is ethically justifiable. The best interests of both existing and new patients are crucially important in a doctor's practice, and the tension between these two groups of patients are contemplated in the arguments below. It is argued that on balance, the refusal to treat unvaccinated children constitutes unjustified discrimination.


Assuntos
Saúde da Criança , Médicos/ética , Recusa em Tratar/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Temas Bioéticos , Criança , Conflito de Interesses , Direitos Humanos , Humanos , Princípios Morais , Autonomia Pessoal , Recusa de Vacinação/ética
13.
BMJ Open ; 9(5): e026299, 2019 05 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31142523

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To explain vaccination refusal in a sample of Australian parents. DESIGN: Qualitative design, purposive sampling in a defined population. SETTING: A geographically bounded community of approximately 30 000 people in regional Australia with high prevalence of vaccination refusal. PARTICIPANTS: Semi structured interviews with 32 non-vaccinating parents: 9 fathers, 22 mothers and 1 pregnant woman. Purposive sampling of parents who had decided to discontinue or decline all vaccinations for their children. Recruitment via local advertising then snowballing. RESULTS: Thematic analysis focused on explaining decision-making pathways of parents who refuse vaccination. Common patterns in parents' accounts included: perceived deterioration in health in Western societies; a personal experience introducing doubt about vaccine safety; concerns regarding consent; varied encounters with health professionals (dismissive, hindering and helpful); a quest for 'the real truth'; reactance to system inflexibilities and ongoing risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest responses tailored to the perspectives of non-vaccinating parents to assist professionals in understanding and maintaining empathic clinical relationships with this important patient group.


Assuntos
Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Pais/psicologia , Recusa de Vacinação/psicologia , Austrália , Feminino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Masculino , Consentimento dos Pais/ética , Consentimento dos Pais/psicologia , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Relações Médico-Paciente/ética , Gravidez , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Recusa de Vacinação/ética
15.
Soc Sci Med ; 228: 181-193, 2019 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30925392

RESUMO

Vaccination programs generate direct protection, herd protection and, occasionally, side effects, distributed over different age groups. This study elicits the general public's view on how to balance these outcomes in funding decisions for vaccines. We performed an optimal design discrete choice experiment with partial profiles in a representative sample (N = 1499) of the population in the United Kingdom in November 2016. Using a panel mixed logit model, we quantified, for four different types of infectious disease, the importance of a person's age during disease, how disease was prevented-via direct vaccine protection or herd protection-and whether the vaccine induced side effects. Our study shows clear patterns in how the public values vaccination programs. These diverge from the assumptions made in public health and cost-effectiveness models that inform decision-making. We found that side effects and infections in newborns and children were of primary importance to the perceived value of a vaccination program. Averting side effects was, in any age group, weighted three times as important as preventing an identical natural infection in a child whereas the latter was weighted six times as important as preventing the same infection in elderly aged 65-75 years. These findings were independent of the length or severity of the disease, and were robust across respondents' backgrounds. We summarize these patterns in a set of preference weights that can be incorporated into future models. Although the normative significance of these weights remains a matter open for debate, our study can, hopefully, contribute to the evaluation of vaccination programs beyond cost-effectiveness.


Assuntos
Opinião Pública , Estigma Social , Valores Sociais , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/psicologia , Adulto , Idoso , Tomada de Decisões , Feminino , Humanos , Julgamento , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reino Unido , Vacinação/psicologia
16.
Rev. Paul. Pediatr. (Ed. Port., Online) ; 37(1): 34-40, Jan.-Mar. 2019. tab
Artigo em Português | LILACS | ID: biblio-985122

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Vacinação/psicologia , Médicos/psicologia , Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudantes de Medicina/psicologia , Estudantes de Medicina/estatística & dados numéricos , Brasil , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Estudos Transversais , Inquéritos e Questionários , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/métodos , Recusa de Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa de Vacinação/psicologia , Recusa de Vacinação/ética
17.
Rev Paul Pediatr ; 37(1): 34-40, 2019.
Artigo em Português, Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30110112

RESUMO

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.


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.


Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Médicos , Estudantes de Medicina , Recusa de Vacinação , Vacinação/psicologia , Adulto , Brasil , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Médicos/psicologia , Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudantes de Medicina/psicologia , Estudantes de Medicina/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/métodos , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa de Vacinação/psicologia
18.
Rev Chil Pediatr ; 90(6): 675-682, 2019 Dec.
Artigo em Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32186592

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Programas Obrigatórios/ética , Programas Obrigatórios/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Movimento contra Vacinação , Chile , Regulamentação Governamental , Humanos , Pais , Autonomia Pessoal , Filosofia , Religião
19.
J Clin Ethics ; 29(3): 206-216, 2018.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30226822

RESUMO

While all states in the United States require certain vaccinations for school attendance, all but three allow for religious exemptions to receiving such vaccinations, and 18 allow for exemptions on the basis of other deeply held personal beliefs. The rights of parents to raise children as they see fit may conflict with the duty of the government and society to protect the welfare of children. In the U.S., these conflicts have not been settled in a uniform and consistent manner. We apply a test that provides a concrete and formal rubric to evaluate such conflicts. For some vaccinations, based on the individual medical characteristics of the disease and the risks of being unvaccinated, the test would suggest that permitting conscientious exemptions is ethical. However, for vaccinations protecting against other diseases that are more severe or easily transmitted, the test would suggest that the federal government may ethically impose laws that deny such exemptions.


Assuntos
Programas Obrigatórios/ética , Recusa de Vacinação/ética , Movimento contra Vacinação , Humanos , Programas Obrigatórios/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados Unidos , Vacinação/ética , Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa de Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...