How do ideas about individualism and collectivism impact on this case?
A3 Description – 1,500 words
Case : A Shot in the Arm?
The Federal Government recently introduced the following measures regarding vaccination of children:
From 1 January 2016, families with children who are not immunised (and do not have an approved exemption) will not receive the FTB Part A end of year supplement and child care subsidies (subject to the passage of legislation).
Vaccine objection will no longer be an exemption category. Families with children that do not have a medical exemption (medical contraindication or natural immunity certified by an immunisation provider) will not receive CCB, CCR, and the FTB Part A end of year supplement for that child (except for children under 12 months for the FTB Part A supplement).
Is it justifiable to impose financial penalties on people who are ‘conscientious objectors’?
You will analyse this case study from two ethical frameworks studied this semester and discuss how each position offers a way of understanding the issue and of responding to it.
Ethical frameworks include =
Consequentialism = Act consequentialism
Nonconsequentialism
Freedom
Absolutism
Relativism
Determinism
In your introduction briefly identify which case study you are using.
Introduce the two frameworks you are using to analyse the case study and briefly describe them.
In the body of your paper you will be required to apply them to the case study.
This means critically analyzing how aspects of the case study might be understood from the two different theoretical frameworks you have chosen.
Your conclusion should address the implications of these two positions for the case study, the people involved and the broader community.
1,500 words
Must use at least 5 academic references.
May use other references than those listed.
Harvard Style of referencing = http://library.uws.edu.au/uws_library/sites/default/files/pdf/cite_Harvard.pdf
Specific questions to think about
What is the impact of freedom of choice?
How do ideas about individualism and collectivism impact on this case?
Is a particular view of vaccination relevant?
Make a note of any questions that arise in your tutorial discussions
Additional readings and resources
Federal Government policy:
https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsibilities/families-and-children/benefits-payments/strengthening-immunisation-for-young-children
Government health data on immunisation:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishing.nsf/content/uci-myths-guideprov
Australian Vaccination Skeptics: *
http://avn.org.au/
*N.B. This website is included as a representation of different sides in the vaccination debate – it is not intended to promote an anti-vaccination position. In terms of evidence it is the equivalent of including a position opposed to the idea of human influenced climate change. This statement is not intended to discredit people’s rights to particular views on vaccination. The case is about the policy action of the government, not the preferred view on vaccination.
Thiroux, J. P. and Krasemann, K.W. (2012) Ethics Theory and Practice 11th Ed
London, England: Pearson International Edition. (chapter 12)