Measles vaccination drive in schools: HC asks govt to inform people about risks of vaccine

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Jan 22 2019 | 5:50 PM IST

The Delhi High Court made it clear to the AAP government Tuesday that the risks of administering measles and rubella vaccine have to be indicated in its advertisements on the vaccination drive to be held in schools, and said express consent of the parent is necessary to vaccinate a child.

"Contra indications are necessary for consent, whether positive or negative. You have to tell people about the risks," Justice Vibhu Bakhru said, adding that the "consent has to be express" and not opt-out.

The observations by the court came after the Delhi government, represented by standing counsel Ramesh Singh, said there was no need to indicate contra-indications or risks of the vaccine as it could discourage people and added that it would be administered to children unless parents state in writing that they are opting out.

The Delhi government's submissions were made in a proposed draft order placed before the court which was hearing pleas on behalf of parents challenging the Directorate of Education's December 12, 2018 notification which said that express consent was not required to administer the vaccine.

The notification had stated that "measles and rubella (MR) vaccination campaign would be held, and all children...will be provided an additional dose of MR vaccine, regardless of previous vaccination status or history of measles/rubella like illness".

The court on January 15 this year had deferred the vaccination drive till further orders.

On Monday it had asked the DoE and the parents to come with an agreed upon draft order which can be incorporated by the court in its final decision.

However, during the arguments on Tuesday, Delhi government differed with the parents on the issue of indicating the risks in the advertisements and on the manner of consent.

The parents, represented by advocates Raj Shekhar Rao, Diya Kapur and Shyel Trehan, told the court that "there can be nothing like opt-out consent. There has to be express consent. It is a matter of bodily integrity. You cannot touch someone's body without their consent."

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jan 22 2019 | 5:50 PM IST

Next Story