Reference no: EM132222453

The debate over mandatory immunizations to protect the public is almost as old as the first immunization (small pox).  Here in NJ we also have a large number of parents who opt out for "personal" reasons yet their children attend public school. While certain US groups like the Amish or fundamentalists do not opt in for religious reasons, they also have their own schools or home school, which protects their children and the public both. When children cannot have immunizations due to a medical reason (compromised immune state), we hope that "cocooning" protects them (having those with contact with the child immunized). Now we have this dilemma in NJ. Should students who are not immunized be excluded from public school during outbreaks? They are potentially putting others at risk. While their parents made this a personal choice, it is not a personal choice for the parents who cannot have their child immunized. Technically, the law in NJ would allow this but I have yet to see any NJ Health Officer do this. Health Departments are mandated to protect the public to the best they can. We  had two high profile cases in NJ concerning Ebola exposure and quarantine, but there were many more here and in other states who quietly at home, self monitored and complied with voluntary quarantine. Who's rights over ride, the public or the individual?

1. Should students who are not immunized be excluded from public school during outbreaks?

2. Who's rights over ride, the public or the individual?