Skip to main content
editorial
. 2005 May;95(5):778–783. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.046193

TABLE 2—

Guiding Principles for Crafting a Draft Nonmedical Vaccination Exemption Provision

  1. While recognizing and protecting the importance of individual freedoms and parental autonomy, legally and ethically these may be limited when they affect the health of others.

  2. Forcing vaccination upon parents who have strongly held conscientious beliefs opposed to vaccination may negatively affect their families.

  3. Imposing vaccination on a significant number of families may create a public backlash that undermines support for any school immunization requirements.

  4. School immunization requirements should carefully balance the public benefit of universal vaccination with individual freedoms and parental autonomy in vaccination choice.

  5. Permitting parents to opt out of school immunization requirements for reasons of strongly held and well-informed conscientious beliefs may reduce the negative impact that mandatory school immunization laws have on such individuals.

  6. Conscientious exemptions from school immunization requirements may help to sustain the broad community consensus required for immunization programs.

  7. Health departments should support legislation ensuring documentation of conscientious and well-informed beliefs against vaccination. The legislation should ensure that the path of least resistance encourages parents to comply with school immunization requirements rather than claiming an exemption simply because it is more convenient than having the child immunized.

  8. All parents should be informed about the risks and benefits of vaccination. Parents considering exemptions should be explicitly informed about the risks of not vaccinating their children.

  9. Health departments should have the final authority to grant or deny exemption requests based upon individual or community risks associated with exemptions and the sincerity of the applicant’s beliefs.