Ask RiotACT: Why is the ACT lagging on vaccination requirements in childcare settings?

TuggLife said :

Is it because we have the second lowest conscientious objection rate, after the NT, and some of the highest overall immunisation rates? Or because we’re waiting to fully realise the impact of the Federal No Jab No Pay policy before rushing into the next measure?

There are less than 400 children recorded as not being immunised due to conscientious objection in the ACT (0.94% of 0-5 year olds). How many of these are in childcare? Are existing exclusion policies effective? Would excluding them permanently increase vaccination rates? Is the risk to the public significant enough to warrant denying children an early childhood education for their parents choice?

I’m very pro-vaccine, but we need to carefully consider the context we make these decisions in, rather than blindly follow other states.

Update: ACT Government is going to conform to a national standard on “no jab no play” and legislate accordingly, in response to PM Malcolm Turnbull’s call for a national approach.

Where are you getting your data from? The Department of Health says 93.56% of ACT preschool aged children are fully immunised.

http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishing.nsf/Content/acir-curr-data.htm

TuggLife said :

Is it because we have the second lowest conscientious objection rate, after the NT, and some of the highest overall immunisation rates? Or because we’re waiting to fully realise the impact of the Federal No Jab No Pay policy before rushing into the next measure?

There are less than 400 children recorded as not being immunised due to conscientious objection in the ACT (0.94% of 0-5 year olds). How many of these are in childcare? Are existing exclusion policies effective? Would excluding them permanently increase vaccination rates? Is the risk to the public significant enough to warrant denying children an early childhood education for their parents choice?

I’m very pro-vaccine, but we need to carefully consider the context we make these decisions in, rather than blindly follow other states.

There may be only 400 formal conscientious objector parents, but they aren’t the target. The ACT vaccination rate varies from 78 per cent – shockingly low – in one demographic, to 98 per cent in just a handful of suburbs. The “no jab no pay no play” target is parents who have forgotten to vaccinate, or just haven’t had an incentive to, rather than anti-vaxxer nutjobs. Those 400 irresponsible parents will, luckily for their children, have children protected by the rest of the population doing the right thing and ensuring everyone’s immunity. Once “no jab no pay no play” is introduced and takes immunisation rates up to a safe level across the community ….

Is it because we have the second lowest conscientious objection rate, after the NT, and some of the highest overall immunisation rates? Or because we’re waiting to fully realise the impact of the Federal No Jab No Pay policy before rushing into the next measure?

There are less than 400 children recorded as not being immunised due to conscientious objection in the ACT (0.94% of 0-5 year olds). How many of these are in childcare? Are existing exclusion policies effective? Would excluding them permanently increase vaccination rates? Is the risk to the public significant enough to warrant denying children an early childhood education for their parents choice?

I’m very pro-vaccine, but we need to carefully consider the context we make these decisions in, rather than blindly follow other states.