Eng123
Composition2
3-4 Annotating Your Sources
This is my intended argument: vaccinations should be mandatory because the instances of the diseases they protect from have either disappeared or are minimal at best. I understand there is a risk involved, but there is a risk involved with everything you do.
This source will support my argument because the biggest argument against mandatory vaccines is the detrimental effects on some children. If you look at the figures in percentage and not just the number, you will see that the risk is minute. With that being said, as a parent and grandparent, I understand you want 0% risk when it comes to your child, but that is unrealistic for any subject.
I think this source will support my other sources because it has both sides of the argument.
Vaccines. (2018). In Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection. Detroit, MI: Gale. Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.snhu.edu/apps/doc/PC3010999291/OVIC?u=nhc_main&sid=OVICd=cab06343
It seems this source is arguing for mandatory vaccinations.
This source uses this evidence to support that argument: The source cites government studies but does not link the reflections in the article.
I believe (the source is doing a good job/bad job of supporting its arguments and why) the source is doing an excellent job of keeping it's argument because it lists all the corresponding statistics to each argument against vaccination.
My problem is whether or not, vaccinations should be mandatory.
This is my intended argument: vaccines should continue to be mandatory, with specific exemptions, due to the fact that the majority of the general public (parents) is not knowledgeable enough, bow...
