When personal choice becomes a public risk.

Hello, everyone.

I welcome you to my blog and another wonderful edition of the Hive Learners' featured post. We all must have heard of the saying "my body, my choice," where individuals decide what they want to do with their body, what they want to wear, what goes into their body, and how they want their body to look. Just to round it up, it means other people's opinions about their body do not count. Now they are bringing the same vibe into something like vaccines and preventive measures, where they decide what type of preventive measures they want to be involved in; they decide the vaccines they want to take sometimes because of personal decisions not to take them and sometimes because of their beliefs.

Source

Now the question is, should they be allowed to have this luxury of not taking vaccines or preventive measures, knowing fully well that their personal choice when it comes to health will not only focus on them but can also affect those around them? I have seen it happen in neighborhoods, and when the consequences of one family's decision came knocking, it did not only knock on their door; it extended to the doors of their neighbors. One time medical practitioners came for the chicken pox and measles vaccines, and a woman refused that her kids should be given the vaccines, claiming she saw on Facebook that children given the vaccines died five days after the vaccines were given. They tried to convince her, and she stood her ground, and since it is a free world, they let her be.

It took just a few weeks before chickenpox became rampant in the neighborhood, and it started from her house, from her kids to other kids, and it's funny how even some adults were affected, and everyone in the neighborhood blamed her. Sometimes personal choices do not mean the consequences will be personal; some personal choices can attract public consequences, and those who were not even there when you made the choice will now have to suffer alongside you.

So, should people be allowed to refuse or decline preventive care even when it can harm others? My answer to this is no, people should not be allowed to refuse preventive care at the expense of others who are innocent. As much as personal freedom and the right as a human being are important, they should never at any point come at the cost of the safety of the public. The government and health practitioners will have to find a way to strike a balance and also set boundaries to the type of personal choice they allow to stand, as it is their duty to protect the public, and any personal choice that poses a threat to that should not be allowed to stand.

Also, using force to get people to agree to preventive care is not the only option here; many of the people who decline preventive care are uneducated, which means enlightening them about the dangers that come with their refusal and helping them see the benefits that come with doing the needful. Sometimes not everything needs force; a peaceful dialogue and convincing them or getting them to be on the same page with you is a way to go about it. Also, health practitioners have to care and put more effort into convincing individuals to accept preventive care, like in the case of this woman, a nurse said it was her business and went ahead to do other things.

Source

It can be annoying getting someone who is adamant to be on the same page with you, but some just require a little more push before they can flip over. Individual choices about accepting or refusing preventive care should not be allowed to stand, especially when it poses a threat to the general public.