this mendoza family justice Intervened in conflicts between families who refused to vaccinate their newborns and clinics who avoided discharge until they met National Vaccination Law.
The boy was born at Cuyo Clinic on Wednesday, September 13, One of the leading private maternity hospitals From Mendoza.
Parents of newborn argue they don’t want two kids Mandatory vaccination within 12 hours of birth: Hepatitis B and tuberculosis (BCG).
The clinic’s medical team approached the legal department for help. Lawyer Sebastián Llanos decided to go to the juvenile justice facility in Las Heras, where the family lives, and informed the Mendoza government’s Interdisciplinary Technical Team (ETI).
The clinic’s legal counsel sent all the documents for the case, including the baby’s medical history, the pediatrician’s opinion and the position of the parents who refused to vaccinate their children and requested vaccinations. Voluntary discharge.
The ruling came a day later, last Friday, by Acting Family Co-Judge Rebeca Natalia Ropero, following an opinion submitted by the Counsel for Minors, who argued that Law No. 27,491 Article 11 and its recent provisions on how to act with minors Official vaccination schedule.
Judge Two vaccines ordered A certificate is sent to the misdemeanor court to assess whether it is appropriate to impose sanctions against the parents for violating state law.
As far as he knows hornwhen the baby’s parents learned of the verdict, They agreed to vaccinate their son. The little boy and his mother were released from the hospital on Friday afternoon.
Lawyer Lanos, professor and chair of health rights and medical responsibility at the National University of Cuyo, explained that in the face of parental rejection, justice must Protect your child’s best interests.
“Newborns have no right to defend themselves. The rights of parents are not absolute but relative. In this case, Legislation to protect minors and ensure that the vaccination schedule must be adhered to. It warns that if it is not complied with, the entire public health is at risk,” explained the clinic’s legal counsel.
SAP’s opinion
Andrea Falaschi, pediatrician and infectious disease specialist, director of epidemiology at the Ministry of Health in Mendoza, explained that the vaccine is domestic coercionand constitute one of the main measures to avoid a series of preventable diseases that seriously harm our health.
“We have a calendar Most important and complete vaccinations Across the world, this enables equitable health for all, which is a public good that we must defend,” Falaschi stressed.
Dr. Pablo Moreno, president of the Argentine Society of Pediatrics (SAP), agreed: “Vaccines are one of the most important health measures for humanity and one of the best guidelines to follow.” Protect the right to health, free and open to everyone. “
parents argument
The family tried to delay vaccinations because it turned out they had another son with the disease autism spectrum disorder They blame the situation on vaccines, although this position has been abandoned by different medical and scientific associations.
In this regard, the president of SAP said: “Scientific evidence shows that There is no link between vaccines and autism“.
In 1998, a study published in a leading scientific journal raised concerns that side effects of the measles vaccine could lead to autism.
“However, this article contains significant scientific and methodological irregularities, which is why the journal withdraws the publication and Its author was sanctioned for fraud. “Studies conclusively show that there is no relationship between MMR vaccination and the risk of autism.”
What are the provisions of vaccination laws?
Iris Aguilar, director of immunization in Mendoza and representative of the Argentine Association of Vaccinology and Epidemiology on the National Immunization Committee, said that situations like the case now resolved by Justice Mendoza have already happened in Argentina, it is always ruled in favor of vaccines.
he remembers 2012 Supreme Court decision, when parents refused to vaccinate their newborns and forced them to do so.Aguilar highlighted recent changes to the Vaccine Act, noting: “Across the 24 jurisdictions, there is still important work to be done to establish What does the axis of adhering to the official vaccine calendar look like? to prevent rights from being infringed. “
Law No. 27,491 defines vaccination as a social good and upholds the primacy of public health over private interests.
It stipulates that the budget for the purchase of vaccines and supplies has so far been invisible and must be borne by the public administration. so, Guaranteed free access to vaccination services at all stages of life.
It also reiterates that the vaccines included in the national calendar, those recommended by health authorities for high-risk groups and those indicated in epidemiological emergencies are mandatory for all residents. It also highlighted the mandatory vaccination of health and laboratory personnel.
Compliance will be recognized through submissions Unified Vaccination Card (CUV) In accordance with the provisions of Article 13, there should be requirements in the admission and exit procedures; Conduct pre-employment and regular work physical examinations; Process or renew DNI, passport, residence permit, pre-marital certificate, professional license, driving license and survival certificate; Process Family allowance and unpaid allowance. The purpose of this measure is not to hinder the vaccination process – as it will not prevent vaccinations – but to expand vaccination coverage in a sustained manner.
This law provides for the establishment National Digital Vaccination Population Registry, in which vaccination data for every resident must be recorded across all jurisdictions and health subsystems (public, social security and private). and the National Temporary Vaccine Registry, created with the aim of having human resources capable of responding to extraordinary situations (mass vaccination campaigns, outbreaks).
It retains the compulsory vaccination system set out in the previous law, instructing education and health teams and all agents or public officials to notify parents who violate their children’s right to vaccination and to consider the possibility of forcing them to do so through a court ruling.
Furthermore, in school vaccination campaigns, children are considered to have the tacit consent of their parents or must refuse and go elsewhere for vaccination. It also provides for sanctions against health personnel who refuse to comply with their obligations or who falsify certificates.