Advertisement

Court-Ordered Measles Vaccinations Upheld

Share
From Associated Press

Two appeals courts on Friday upheld court-ordered measles vaccinations for five children whose parents belong to a church that shuns medical care, after another child from the church died of measles.

“Society does put limitations on religious rights,” Superior Court Judge Vincent Cirillo said.

Three families had appealed a Philadelphia Family Court ruling ordering the vaccinations, saying their religious abhorrence of medical treatment outweighed concerns about protecting the three boys and two girls from a measles epidemic.

Advertisement

After Cirillo’s decision, the families immediately appealed to the state Supreme Court, which also refused to block the vaccination order.

Doris Leisch, assistant city solicitor, said officials would “proceed with all dispatch” to vaccinate the children. She said the families did not appeal the ruling further.

The families’ attorney, Jerome Balter, and officials of the Faith Tabernacle Congregation, where all three families are members, did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

The latest victim of the epidemic--which has killed eight children and sickened more than 700 other people since December--was 19-month-old James Jones. Officials said the child contracted measles nearly two weeks ago.

He died Thursday morning at a hospital, one day after his father alerted health officials.

His mother is a member of Faith Tabernacle, as are the families of four other victims. The family of one child who died belongs to First Century Gospel Church, which has similar beliefs.

None of the victims had been inoculated against measles, officials said.

“I have a great deal of respect for the people involved here, and the faith they have, but the illness their children can contract is deadly,” Cirillo said.

Advertisement

“These parents have a right to practice their religion if it doesn’t interfere with the safety of others,” he added.

Balter argued that the vaccinations would violate the families’ religious liberty.

The judge responded: “When that freedom interferes with the rights of other people, there is the right to intervene.”

Advertisement