Hello!

29 Comments

Anti-vaxxers who refuse to have their children immunised will be penalised $28 every fortnight.

From July, Family Tax Benefit A payments will be reduced by $28 a fortnight for each child who does not meet the immunisation requirements, reports The Advertiser.

The Government will scrap a former “No Jab, no Pay” penalty which withheld $726 end-of-year payments from anti-vaccination parents.

Many families who received Family Payment A were already ineligible for the end-of-year supplement because their incomes were too high.

Social Services Minister Christian Porter and Health Minister Greg Hunt said a fortnightly penalty would serve as a constant reminder to parents of the importance of vaccinating their children.

“Since the No Jab, No Pay policy started in January last year, more than 210,000 families have taken action to ensure that they now meet the immunisation requirements,’’ Mr Porter said.

“As a result of the Government’s No Jab No Pay policy, national immunisation rates have increased across all three target groups of one, two and five-year-olds.

“This means children and the wider community are being protected from preventable diseases like whooping cough.”

Exemptions from the requirements exist for children who have medical conditions which would prevent them safely receiving immunisations.

Do you think this is the best way to incentivise these families to reconsider their choice?

Share your comments below.

Shutterstock photo

  • it is a very controlling method to do this to people but it is in the best interest of the child and the community to be protected. i am all for vaccinations as it what i feel is the right thing to do for my children

    Reply

  • its a very emotional topic. For those whose children have had a reaction to vaccination my heart does go out to them but also for those whose babies are too young to vaccinate that have had to endure diseases that could be preventable I also feel for them. Its difficult to know what is best. Personally I think vaccination to be a good thing.

    Reply

  • Very interesting procedure put in place

    Reply

  • This should stop a lot of those who are not vaccinating their children out of laziness to take them rather than having a valid reason. If they do think they have a valid reason they can argue their case.

    Reply

  • This is a good incentive to the families who don’t vaccinate their children. I can’t understand why people will only vaccinate their children if they are going to profit from doing so.

    Reply

  • This is definitely a great start, however, there are a lot of wealthy families out there who are anti-vaxers and this simply would not affect them in any way. They need to come up with other measures that will drive a hard bargain with all families.

    Reply

  • Unless your child has an illness to which immunisation could be fatal they may be putting their child aat considerable risk of permanent side effects of some diseases.

    Reply

  • No, I don’t think this is the way. It doesn’t leave enough room for the individual cases and there are certainly dangers connected to immunisations.
    I’m not an anti-vaxxer, but I’m not a pro-vaxxer either !

    Reply

  • I am NOT an anti-vaxxer, in fact I took each of my 3 children for their vaccinations, but ended up rushing them each to hospital within half an hour because of severe allergic reaction. They then spent days in ICU on life support whilst I sat at their bedsides wondering if their next breath would be their last.
    I now have contact with other families whose children suffered similar allergic reactions…in my case (and in two others), it was the base/carrier of the vaccine that caused the problems, and even the medication available on hospital “crash carts” have the same base, so they only accelerated the reaction.
    This legislation completely ignores that there are families whose children’s lives are critically endangered by these vaccines. NO!!!! I am not referring to the recently debunked link to autism (although I still believe that research should be continued) this is an ALLERGIC REACTION to the immunisations, it is something completely separate and one that is still being ignored.
    I know when my first child had her first reaction my mother recalled that I too suffered fits after receiving mine, not as severe as my child’s but fits none the less. I’m in my 60’s and yet still the same base/carrier is used in vaccinations and other medical injections, resulting in allergic reactions. There has been NO development to these bases in all those years to make them less reactive.
    Anyone who has tried to do battle with Centrelink, armed with their medical documents, will tell you that it’s akin to bashing one’s head against a brick wall. Centrelink is a law onto it’s own self, one where commonsense does not exist, and they will repeatedly negate any document one has, until, after one’s job is at risk after spending months trying to get your case heard, one gives up the battle. These parents pay taxes too, and NO, they are not bludgers…
    Their children share the same problem as mine, and as many others have through the years, yet this problem is ignored. It won’t be until a high ranking politician’s family is similarly affected that anything will be done against the ALLERGIC reaction to vaccinations….it will continue to be swept under the carpet!


    • My daughters are now grown but when we were going through all the vaccination years my middle daughter would react very strongly to each vaccine and would end up in hospital everytime. I wont go into all the dramas we had with her but with her it ended up that I had to delay the vaccination schedule until she was older and her body was more able to handle it. Then she simply had the normal reactions like a mild fever. Each child is different and some children for various reasons cant be vaccinated on time.

    Reply

  • I think it is a good start, but I think more needs to be done. My girls are both immunised because that is what I believe in. I had to prove my kids were immunised to send them to school and I find out that others at the same school don’t vaccinate but are allowed in to the school! I don’t think that is fair – I think schools play a huge part in either educating the parents who are no vaxers and protecting those children who are vaccinated and have done the right thing – as we have seen epidemics of whooping cough and chicken pox in recent years we really need to tighten up and protect our children

    Reply

  • Whilst I agree with some types of immunisation, I also disagree with other types.

    The research is strong in some areas where it has been beneficial, for instance the polio and diphtheria, which have seen a significant decline in these horrific diseases.

    Yet on the other hand, I had my children fully immunised and they ended up with the worst case of Chicken Pox that the Drs had seen in years. They even had to get all the training Drs in to see what chicken pox this severe looked like. Yes, they were fully immunised and it made no difference, and both were on different years and immunisation batching. The Drs were blown away. So should they have had this, and would i do this again, absolutely not. if they are going to get it, i would rather they get it now, than when older.

    At the end of the day, we trust that the immunisation is meant to be helpful to us. Yet, do we really know what they put in the vaccines. Absolutely not. All we know it is a lethal concoction of goodness knows what, doing who know what to our bodies let alone to our children’s bodies.

    What has come to light recently is that some strains of vaccinations are filled with high levels of mercury. We see some families and their children are just fine, but after the vaccinations, their children are no longer fine. Coincidence maybe, but then these families are constantly being hushed up. Again another debate that we will start to see answers on in the next 10 years.

    However, the light of big pharmas is all about the dollars they can make, and who are the targets, the innocence of the population – what a great target market and great untold and unknowing participants for these to carry out their plans.

    Yet, the whistle blowers of these organisations will tell you and it is becoming more and more known today, that we should not and i repeat their words “should not be” using some of these vaccinations. Some of their stories are horrific, and they are now spilling this information to the world, for people to take a stand and make choices.

    At the end of the day, these are our children, and whilst i do agree with some vaccinations, i do not agree with others. It should be a right of choice, we as individuals should have options.

    For taking away our options, also reduces our freedoms of speech and freedoms of rights.

    No authority should be controlling what we do, however, they can provide options. We should also be given the option to alternative and natural options or even Eastern Medicine options which predates the likes of all these vaccinations.

    To agree or disagree, there is no singular answer, but no one should singularly be targeted by govts for not complying.

    Shall we convert this discussion to the misuse of govt funding or the breach of the laws by political and police officials and so it goes on. Absolutely not, this is merely showing the conjecturing nature of such a debate.

    I know there are people who will read this and not agree, and others who will agree, but that is a right of choice, and no one should be judged for that choice.

    to vaccinate, should be a right of choice, just like you get to choose the food you eat – however i would not eat a bunch of toxic chemicals as a choice for my lunch when i can eat wholesome foods!!!!


    • al2ab I agree with what you have sensibly pointed out, we are having an overkill of vaccinations. Most people are not aware that the ‘wild chicken pox virus’ actually protected other children from getting more serious complications and older people developing shingles. Chicken pox vaccination is now killing off the natural immunity and making it worse. There needs to be more awareness about the ingredients used in vaccinations that are unsafe and yet they continue to use them because it is cheaper therefore more dollars are made. Penalising parents for their unvaccinated children will do nothing to encourage more vaccinations. How for example can an older child or teenager who has never been vaccinated be made to get catch up vaccinations when they totally refuse?

    Reply

  • I think it’s a start – but the penalties should be higher.

    Reply

  • To be honest, I think $28 a fortnight won’t even be noticed by many. I think it won’t make any difference.

    Reply

  • It’s a step in the right direction!

    Reply

  • Without upsetting anyone…… It may be effective with some, but unfortunately $28 is nothing for many Anti Vaxers. Like with people earning traffic fines and the like, treat them like the immature people law breakers they are and take away a decent $$ value, other privileges and benefits.

    While I do not agree with some laws and rules, while they are in force, I follow 100% with respect to my community.

    Reply

Post a comment
Like Facebook page

LIKE MoM on Facebook

Please enter your comment below
Would you like to include a photo?
No picture uploaded yet.
Please wait to see your image preview here before hitting the submit button.
Your MoM account


Lost your password?

Enter your email and a password below to post your comment and join MoM:

You May Like

Loading…

Looks like this may be blocked by you browser or content filtering.

↥ Back to top

Thanks For Your Star Rating!

Would you like to add a written rating or just a star rating?

Write A Rating Just A Star Rating
Join