My nine month old received the H1N1 vaccine today at his pediatrician’s office. When it is more widely available I will do the same. However, the path to vaccination was surprisingly crooked for my family. And my family’s thought process on the matter is likely shared by others.

I don’t get the annual flu shot, yet I quickly accepted that H1N1 is a different animal. More generally I believe in the importance of vaccination and our son has received all his routine shots.

My wife and I have decided to get the H1N1 shot. We will do it first and foremost to avoid unknowingly exposing our child. If we were without children, and especially if I were living alone, I’m not sure what I would do.

But what to do for a nine month old who is not even in daycare? Our concern is driven by being first time parents as well as living in a rich and cautious society. Simply put - I didn’t view an additional vaccine for my young child as routine, even though I trust the recommendations of doctors.

Respected historian Michael Bliss, who is on tonight’s program, outlined the rational reality in last Saturday’s Globe and Mail:

When it comes to thinking about our health, we seem to divide into three camps. At one extreme are the fearful, those predisposed to see health as infinitely fragile and constantly menaced by terrible threats – killer viruses in the eyes of some, killer vaccines in the view of others. It's the anxious and the obsessive who are the loudest voices in the media, clog clinics and hospitals, fulminate against demonic vaccinators and incompetent doctors, and try to weave suffocating protective cocoons around themselves and their families.

At the other extreme are the indifferent and irresponsible, who take their good health, their apparent immunity to disease and disease-talk for granted, and just tune out. We're all right, Jack. Not our problem. Cough, cough.

Most Canadians probably fall into a middle group. They're sensible people who don't like being sick, care for each other and take reasonable precautions to protect themselves and others. They have a sense of their good fortune in living in the 21st century and a sense of proportion about their priorities. When our health is at risk, we pay attention to our doctors and take our medicines and our vaccines.

I think I'm in that middle group, but there are three issues that remain. First, how severe is H1N1?

Health officials and governments justifiably put procedures in place to vaccinate the whole population. Yet according to the mass of information in the media it remains unclear how severe H1N1 could potentially be. This leaves some people wondering if a mass vaccination is necessary.

The vaccination process went relatively smoothly this morning even though the pediatrician’s office was swamped. This is in contrast to the media reports of frustrated citizens in hours-long line ups across the country.

Second, what level of risk is socially tolerable?

Would I be a bad parent for not vaccinating myself and my child? Is it irrational for someone not in a high-risk group to say no to vaccination?

Risk is in part in the eye of the beholder and by vaccinating or not one makes a statement. While I calculated the level of risk to be too high for my family to forego the vaccine, are those who choose not to vaccinate necessarily irresponsible?

A couple of Agenda episodes from last season came to mind as I was thinking about this question. One deals with risk and you can see it here:

The other examined the science and politics of H1N1:

My third and final concern is: do the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the possible costs for an infant?

On the face of it this is an illogical argument considering that young children are considered high risk. But being a first time parent of a young child often brings out the cautious, arguably irrational side.

Yet to publicly express such anguish is difficult in a society where a parent can feel like someone ready to cry out “bad parent” lurks around every corner. Again this is not quite rational, but we are all at times irrational beings.

Last season I wrote a blog post called What to do when the science is not so clear? In the case of the H1N1 virus the science is clear: vaccinations are safe and offer a certain level of protection, but at times the confusing mass of messages can make this hard to see.

However, should the science-based use of probabilities be used to outright dismiss those who either find the argument unclear or lacking? In a free society, an individual should be allowed to decline a vaccine unless it is clearly necessary. And is the H1N1 vaccine clearly necessary?

We promote critical thinking, so the voices of those rationally critical of positions of governments and health officials should not be trampled in the rush to immunize. We are doing a disservice to greater society if we do not engage these people as they work through a personal understanding of H1N1.

So with all these questions out there, I know that while my family has chosen to vaccine, many others will not.

Tonight’s program is part of a continuing public discourse on H1N1. What’s your view of the situation? Please share your thoughts here.