CP doesn’t change anti-vaxxer opinions.

“This study found there was just no major change to that vaccine-objector group with the ‘no jab, no pay’ policy,” Beard said. “But on the positive side, a substantial number of people did catch up vaccination which led to modest increases in overall vaccine coverage. It was always thought by experts that the policy might have little impact on vaccine refusers. This study certainly provides evidence to support that.”∂ Prof Julie Leask, an expert on vaccination attitudes and behaviour from the University of Sydney, said the policy simply served as a prompt for people already happy to vaccinate their children – but did not work on those who actively rejected vaccines.∂ “We did in-depth interviews with this group for up to two hours, and we have done a number of studies with these vaccine-refusal groups now, and what we hear from them is that when you take away choice it causes a psychological reaction and it’s an anger towards having one’s choice removed,” Leask said.∂ “That caused people to dig down more, and we saw that coming through in this study with parents continuing not to vaccinate despite the policy, and in fact it suggests some who were on the fence said, ‘That’s it, if they force me I won’t do it at all.’ ”∂ Leask was concerned that by removing the conscientious objector exemption, which required people to have a signed note from their doctor or nurse, it removed an opportunity for healthcare providers to engage with those who refused vaccinations.∂ “At least there was more of a chance of engagement with mainstream medical services which would continue to give parents opportunities to review their decision,” she said.∂ “Another aspect often ignored in thinking about no jab no pay is that it means significant financial hardship for a minority of families who are vaccine refusers and that doesn’t just impact the parents, it means the kids are missing out too.”