UCHastings Instagram

          #Repost Chancellor & Dean @frankhwu
          Instagram Photo Likes pkrummenacher, esalg_002, kmatayoshi and 10 others like this.
          Thursday, September 12, 2013

          Professor Dorit Reiss on the Legal Duties of Parents Who Choose Not to Vaccinate

          "If you choose to reject expert opinion and believe you know more than the majority of doctors, scientists, and health officials, you should not roll the costs of that choice onto others. The legal system can, and should, hold those responsible for harm if it is determined that their actions led to another person’s suffering."
          Professor Dorit R. Reiss

          Professor Dorit R. Reiss

          A German boy named Micha died last June after several years of agony from a rare but fatal complication of measles called subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE). 

          While still too young to be vaccinated himself, he contracted measles from an unvaccinated child in a pediatrician’s waiting room. Years later, SSPE erupted. One family’s choice not to vaccinate their child effectively destroyed another family.

          In the United States, where health insurance coverage is more limited than in Germany, Micha’s parents could have incurred substantial medical costs on top of their incredible heartache and suffering. The question is, would it be reasonable to hold the unvaccinated parents liable for those costs?

          In a recent blog post, Bioethicist Arthur Caplan suggested that in cases similar to Micha’s, the non-vaccinating parents should be held responsible. 

          There are two arguments that can be used to support Caplan’s points and justify tort liability.  The first focuses on compensation for the victims. The medical and scientific consensus is that the risks of vaccinating are significantly smaller than the risks of not vaccinating.  Therefore, those that do not vaccinate are choosing the larger risk: an unreasonable choice. Since the tort of negligence was created specifically to compensate those harmed because of another’s unreasonable choice, the conditions of tort liability apply.

          The second argument focuses on preventing externalities observed when parents roll the cost of their decisions onto others.  Several studies have shown that unvaccinated children are at increased risk of vaccine preventable diseases, and therefore more likely to transmit those diseases and cause others harm.  If parents are not held responsible and forced to pay when their unvaccinated child infects another, they will not consider those costs when deciding whether or not to vaccinate. However, assigning liability in these cases will encourage parents to include those costs into their calculation.

          Read the complete blog post from Professor Reiss from Shot of Prevention here.

          Go to News Archive

          Share this Story

          Share via Facebook
          Share via TwitterShare via EmailPrint Friendly Version

          Other Recent Stories/ RSS

          Friday, August 28, 2015

          Margie Lariviere ‘94 Talks Insurance and the Secret to Happiness

          After spending over 20 years working in insurance law, Margie Lariviere ’94 is now General Counsel at State Fund
          Wednesday, August 26, 2015

          Magazine Preview: Feeding China's Growth With U.S. Capital

          Despite the Chinese market correction, William Uchimoto '81 sees prosperity in a new stock exchange. By Vanessa Hua. 
          Tuesday, August 25, 2015

          From Humble Beginnings to Supreme Court Justice, Marvin Baxter ’66 Shares Insights in Commemorative Volumes

          Students will now be able to read the Justice's opinions during his time at the highest court of the state.
          Friday, August 21, 2015

          Thinkers & Doers: August 21, 2015

          UC Hastings community members in the news and making moves, August 1, 2015 - August 21, 2015.
          Thursday, August 20, 2015

          Opening Tech’s Doors to Women of Color

          A partnership between UC Hastings’ Startup Legal Garage and the pioneering nonprofit Black Girls Code is a win-win for both.
          Go to News Archive