Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to OOF

Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: This case has serious implications  (Read 3265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Entwood

  • Omega Queen
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • North Wiltshire
  • Posts: 19566
  • My Old 3.2 V6 Elite (LPG)
    • Audi A6 Allroad 3.0 DTI
    • View Profile
Re: This case has serious implications
« Reply #30 on: 13 October 2013, 12:57:23 »

There are several "sides" to this ... some not mentioned ..

With freedom comes responsibility .. so who will take responsibility IF the worst happens and she falls ill and suffers either mental or physical disability ??

I would guess the Mother would very quickly demand full treatment and backup, and probably compensation in todays culture, so the State would end up with the responsibility and its associated costs - possibly over a very long time - is it therefore "unfair" for the same State to require preventative measures to be taken to reduce the impact of the illness ??

Further, should she fall ill she has the potential to spread the disease, and thus endanger others, does her "right to freedom" give her the right to endanger others ???

Where is the "responsibility" there ??
Logged

05omegav6

  • Guest
Re: This case has serious implications
« Reply #31 on: 13 October 2013, 13:01:41 »

Just another petulant teenager who needs a clip round the ear and told you will do it.
Quite :-X

If they were that balanced in their understand of the jab and the implications of having it (or not), then there would be no need for this situation as either the children would have already had the jab, or been able to present a substantiated reason for not having it ::)
Logged

05omegav6

  • Guest
Re: This case has serious implications
« Reply #32 on: 13 October 2013, 13:03:36 »

There are several "sides" to this ... some not mentioned ..

With freedom comes responsibility .. so who will take responsibility IF the worst happens and she falls ill and suffers either mental or physical disability ??

I would guess the Mother would very quickly demand full treatment and backup, and probably compensation in todays culture, so the State would end up with the responsibility and its associated costs - possibly over a very long time - is it therefore "unfair" for the same State to require preventative measures to be taken to reduce the impact of the illness ??

Further, should she fall ill she has the potential to spread the disease, and thus endanger others, does her "right to freedom" give her the right to endanger others ???

Where is the "responsibility" there ??
Either way we pick up the tab :-\

Seems to me that the mothers' view of responsibility is simply to her children and blocks to everyone else :-\
Logged

Gaffers

  • Omega Queen
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • NE Hampshire/Surrey
  • Posts: 11322
    • Ford Ranger Wildtrak
    • View Profile
Re: This case has serious implications
« Reply #33 on: 13 October 2013, 21:02:19 »

If people dont want a simple harmless jab that is necessary for everybodies public health then they can do one to a country where most people dont get the opportunity (I have been there and seen the effects) , instead of sneezing on my cornflakes >:(
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 17 queries.