爱思学雅思频道特为大家收集整理了雅思写作Task2范文：社会类(5)。认真研读一定的雅思范文及作文模板可以帮助我们检验自己的写作水平，并能很好地吸收和应用优秀范文里的优秀内容~更多雅思报名官网的最新消息，最新、最专业的雅思备考资料，爱思学雅思频道将第一时间为大家发布。
Should parents be obliged to immunise their children against childhood
diseases? Or do individuals have the right to choose not to immunise their
children?
Model Answer 1:
Some people argue that the state does not have the right to make parents
immunise their children. However, I feel the question is not whether they should
immunise but whether, as members of society, they have the right not to.
Preventative medicine has proved to be the most effective way of reducing
the incidence of fatal childhood diseases. As a result of the widespread
practice of immunising young children in our society, many lives have been saved
and the diseases have been reduced to almost zero.
In previous centuries children died from ordinary illnesses such as
influenza and tuberculosis and because few people had immunity, the diseases
spread easily. Diseases such as dysentery were the result of poor hygiene but
these have long been eradicated since the arrival of good sanitation and clean
water. Nobody would suggest that we should reverse this good practice now
because dysentery has been wiped out.
Serious diseases such as polio and smallpox have also been eradicated
through national immunisation programmes. In consequence, children not immunised
are far less at risk in this disease-free society than they would otherwise be.
Parents choosing not to immunise are relying on the fact that the diseases have
already been eradicated. If the number of parents choosing not to immunise
increased, there would be a similar increase in the risk of the diseases
returning.
Immunisation is not an issue like seatbelts which affects only the
individual. A decision not to immunise will have widespread repercussions for
the whole of society and for this reason, I do not believe that individuals have
the right to stand aside. In my opinion immunisation should be obligatory.
Model Answer 2:
The issue of whether we should force parents to immunise their children
against common diseases is, in my opinion, a social rather than a medical
question. Since we are free to choose what we expose our bodies to in the way of
food, drink, or religion for that matter, why should the question of medical
'treatment' be any different?
Medical researchers and governments are primarily interested in overall
statistics and trends and in money-saving schemes which fail to take into
consideration the individual's concerns and rights. While immunisation against
diseases such as tetanus and whooping cough may be effective, little information
is released about the harmful effects of vaccinations which can sometimes result
in stunted growth or even death.
The body is designed to resist disease and to create its own natural
immunity through contact with that disease. So when children are given
artificial immunity, we create a vulnerable society which is entirely dependent
on immunisation. In the event that mass immunisation programmes were to cease,
the society as a whole would be more at risk than ever before.
In addition there is the issue of the rights of the individual. As members
of a society, why should we be obliged to subject our children to this
potentially harmful practice? Some people may also be against immunisation on
religious grounds and their needs must also be considered.
For these reasons I feel strongly that immunisation programmes should not
be obligatory and that the individual should have the right to choose whether or
not to participate.
爱思学 - 您的教育规划师
