Vaccination and the Child's Right to an Open Future

Abstract

States commonly require the vaccination of children through their parens pa- triae and police powers. But many states also allow parents to opt for non- medical exemptions from these vaccination requirements, contributing to the emergence of a national vaccine hesitancy crisis. By permitting parents not to vaccinate their children, do states that grant these exemptions violate children’s rights? This Article posits that children may indeed have a right to be vaccinated and thus protected against contracting a disease for which there is a scientifically proven vaccine. This Article examines this question through the lens of Joel Feinberg’s theory of the child’s “right to an open future.” This theoretical framework distinguishes this Article from other contemporary child-rights scholarship by providing a cohesive liberal approach to discourse surrounding vaccine exemptions. Building from Feinberg’s theory, this Article reconciles constitutional jurisprudence, liberal conceptions of individual rights, and the rights of future adults to choose from among a reasonable range of life plans. This Article begins by examining the conflicting legal rights related to a child’s right to be vaccinated—the parents’ right to raise their children under the Fourteenth Amendment versus the state’s interest in protecting children from harmful diseases. The Article then explains why a child’s right to be vaccinated may exist as an extension of a child’s “right to an open future” under Feinberg’s theory. The Article next addresses potential legal and ethical objections to its thesis and explains how each is unavailing.