In the original public argument which address parents against vaccines, the first body paragraph stated the main reason vaccines should be required. On the other hand, this new public argument would begin with the concept of herd immunity. With a sympathetic tone, I would express that the people who are most affected by unvaccinated children are kids who are too young to be vaccinated or are unable to receive vaccinations due to medical reasons. The original paper supported the argument with statistics such as, “It is estimated that around 42,000 adults along with 300 children pass away each year due to illness that are avoidable with a simple immunization.” This approach is no longer usable in the revised argument because it doesn’t appeal to the new audience. The new audience would be more convinced by an argument that appealed to their emotions. A great example of this would be, “One unvaccinated child could cause measles, polio, mumps, whooping cough, or small pox to reappear. After hearing this statistic, the parents would want every child at Manzanita to be vaccinated. My hope is that this argument encourages them to spread the word about the importance of …show more content…
The presence of this rebuttal could cause parents to second guess their position regarding the urgency of vaccines. The original rebuttal began with, “A common belief among many parents is that vaccines are not always effective, so it’s not worth taking the risk of vaccinating your child.” This would be replaced with a paragraph dedicated to a story about how a child was negatively effected by the parent’s decision to not vaccinate. An emotional story will be the last push to convince the parents to promote vaccines. This strong end to the argument appeals perfectly to the emotions of the