• MyBrainHurts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 days ago

    That’s not really a tricky balance, there is a clear right direction to pick

    I love that you “know” the right direction without even knowing how margjnalized folks might feel about it.

    Just to be clear, your opinion is that the government should just force marginalized folks to do what we think is the right thing regardless of their feelings or experiences?

    (And if your second paragraph is a serious question, you could literally just google Canada First Nations vaccine hesitancy and learn a whole boatload.)

      • MyBrainHurts
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Sorry, I’m clearly not understanding your position… Vaccines should be mandatory but also not?

        • Victor Villas
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yes. Just like they already kind of are in a bunch of ways. At the very least they should be opt-out instead of opt-in, with immunization campaigns deployed in the spirit of increasingly making opt-out more exceptional

            • Victor Villas
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              How so? Encouraging people to vaccinate their kids and making the vaccine free is still an “opt in” system. What I mean with an opt out system is that it would demand effort and a processual review to not vaccinate (at some level, even if at the community level), like filing for being excused of immunization and having that file as part of the immunization record.

              • MyBrainHurts
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                Maybe you should learn more about how the system functions before demanding changes?

                Vaccines are largely done in schools with parents having to opt out.

                All you’ve prosed is to add a weird layer of bureaucracy with no discernible benefit.

                Edit: And yes, refusals to vaccinate are already part of someone’s record. (This system is already used to contact people who have refused and to offer another round of immunizations etc.)

                • Victor Villas
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 days ago

                  But that bureaucracy is what I mean with friction that defines what opting out means. Being invited to immunization and having ease to refuse is still opt in to me.

                  refusals to vaccinate are already part of someone’s record

                  Maybe I am just unaware but what I understood from what goes into the record is that someone saying “no thanks, vaccines are a lie” is indistinguishable from “the healthcare system wronged my community so I don’t feel safe with this”. If those cases are indeed already distinguishable and I’m just mistaken, then I’ll be gladly corrected because it means that we are already equipped to to make vaccination mandatory, because all we need is to have the due process to accommodate the concerns of the second group.

                  • MyBrainHurts
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    8 hours ago

                    Sorry, was responding to someone else and realized I’d forgotten about this over the weekend.

                    But yeah, if you’ve met an anti vaxxer, you’d know yet another form or whatever isn’t really the friction that’s going to get them to vaccinate. Right now, you’re proposing setting up some sort of, I dunno, interview process where we figure out how much trauma or marginalization allows someone to exempt themselves. (Is being Jewish and having family members who were experimented on enough? How about being Black but in Canada? Or having relatives from any number of autocratic regimes where government trust is not really a thing? And then how are we going to check this?)

                    This proposal is at a time when we don’t have enough nurses or doctors and you want to spend a silly amount of money on adding more bureaucracy to make things slightly more difficult for a group that already went through way harsher just a few years ago? Really? And then spend however much more to lose in court?

                    I get that not everyone thinks through the rammifications and anti-vaxxer = bad so punish them but this doesn’t seem particularly practical or beneficial no matter how laudable the goal of more vaccinations is.