A reason NOT to move to Texas

[lady_kishiria]

I grant, there are a few, but this one is new.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16975112/wid/11915773?GT1=9033

The governor there is demanding that all schoolgirls receive the new HPV vaccine. Now, I've been hoping for this vaccination for years and was overjoyed when it came out although AFAIK I'm too old to receive it. However, some politician telling parents that their daughter MUST have it sets every civil-liberties alarm in my mind to screaming.

People are arguing that it's no different than the smallpox, polio, and measles vaccines. Some parents would argue that making those mandatory impinges on their rights to raise their children, and since I've read some scary things on those vaccines I must say I'm undecided.

There is one clear difference between the above mentioned diseases and Gardasil. Those diseases are transmitted through air, water (such as in a swimming pool), or touching something an infected person has touched. HPV is usually (not always) sexually transmitted, and this has further implications to parents.

I come from a Latino family where, even Americanized as they were, my purity was very much the pillar of the family's "honour". (This, by the way, is where my much-discussed hatred of the whole concept of "honour" comes from.) I know my parents, my mother especially, would have objected to the implication that I'd be sleeping around at the age of 11. Where would my parents' rights over me be?

I know that when I was 11, the idea of being forced to have this vaccine would have outraged and upset me. I was a very pious child, with further complications stemming from an obvious case of sexual identity dysphoria, and I would have seen the clear implications that they were expecting I'd do "it" with a boy. Where would MY rights to my own body be?

Lastly, the vaccine has only been on the market a few months, so it's unknown if there are any side effects. Some should be expected; even the standard ones have them. That in and of itself would make me as a parent hesitant to have my daughter innoculated.

When I first heard of the vaccine, I pictured it as something older teens and young women would take voluntarily. Making it mandatory for middle-school girls feels like violation, not liberation. From Gardasil it's a short jump to birth control, and while I support making birth control easily available to all who need it, making it mandatory would be disgusting and wrong.

It took a while to fully articulate why this story bothers me so much. I'm looking forward to what libertarianhawk in particular has to say about it.

Comments

[garpu.livejournal.com]

Agreed...my first thought was that they're going to have a hell of a lot of lawsuits on their hands, if there are substantial side effects.

[prushrush.livejournal.com]

I find it repulsive.

Many of the vaccinations that are on the market today are known to cause cognitive defects - the rise in autism cases in the past few years has been linked (loosely) to vaccinations, and so I worry about the potential side-effects of this. Not to mention the obvious reason why this vaccine was made mandatory - lobbying.

What concerns me more than lobbying or side-effects is the seeming want of the American government to increasingly try legislate the rights of women and youth away, especially when it comes to lifestyle decisions that parents should be the ones making.

[patgund.livejournal.com]

Actually the studies connecting mercury-based vaccines and the rise in autism have been pretty well shot down. Especially when the doctor who did the research was found to be taking money before the research from attorneys hoping to profit in lawsuits. Lancet also revoked the original article as well. And in countries that they banned mercury-based vaccines, the reports of autism are STILL on the rise.

Whatever the cause of autism, (and there seems to be a heavy genetic cause to some types, especially with possible deletions in chromosome 5 or 7), I think mercury-based vaccines have been ruled out.

As for the HPV vaccine, my surprise was that "Goodhair" Perry really depends on his base in the Religious Right, and they're screaming about this now - they didn't want the HPV vaccine approved by the FDA at all because they felt it would be promoting sexual activity before marriage.

[prushrush.livejournal.com]

Actually the studies connecting mercury-based vaccines and the rise in autism have been pretty well shot down. Especially when the doctor who did the research was found to be taking money before the research from attorneys hoping to profit in lawsuits. Lancet also revoked the original article as well. And in countries that they banned mercury-based vaccines, the reports of autism are STILL on the rise.

Whatever the cause of autism, (and there seems to be a heavy genetic cause to some types, especially with possible deletions in chromosome 5 or 7), I think mercury-based vaccines have been ruled out.

Ah, I didn't know that. Thanks for the clarification :)

[desert-vixen.livejournal.com]

Right - like the danger of HPV and cervical cancer was the ONLY thing keeping teenage girls from engaging in premarital sex.

I don't f*cking think so.

DV

[khandreia.livejournal.com]

You kinda touched a nerve there by bringing up autism, what with my being a high-functioning autistic and all. If it's something that's supposed to be there from birth (my dad suspected it in me when I was little, before I went through the barrage of vaccinations and well before my official diagnosis at 19), I really don't think vaccinations have anything to do with it. I personally think it's little more than curebie parents grasping at straws to find something to place the blame on because they don't know what to do with their autistic kids.

As it is, the whole cervical cancer vaccine issue also touches a nerve with me, as my mom had cervical cancer when I was very young, and she ended up having to get a full hysterectomy to remove it. (Take that, idiot fundies who think that only promiscuous women get/should get it!) Even though it's not hereditary, I still worry a little that I might get it eventually. Where was this vaccine a few years ago or so when I was still in the recommended age window and before I first became sexually active?

Maybe it's just me, but I honestly don't see what is so wrong with the idea in theory, lobbying and lack of testing aside (both of which I'll agree leave me on the semi-tentative side). Kids are already required to get a whole bunch of other vaccines for school, aren't they? Nobody seems to complain about those. It's just another shot that girls have to get, that's all. As it is, they've been saying on the news that parents can choose to opt out of it for various reasons (including religious reasons), so I don't see why there's an uproar over the whole idea that they're being "forced" into it.

[mukhtar.livejournal.com]

I think one reason they are trying to set the age requirement so low is so that people DON'T associate it with sexual activity. You said it yourself, HPV is usually (not always) sexually transmitted, meaning there are other ways of contracting it. It also means that if the girl ever DOES have a sexual relationship (even when married) she could still contract it.

The main issue everyone has with this vaccine is that it *could possibly* be associated with sexual activity. The fact that someone is trying to dictate what people do with their own bodies in even a remote way relating to the reproductive organs is a hot spot that sets people off. If this were for any other form of cancer, people would be all for someone having it be a requirement to get into school. It's just like the flu shot, Hep A, Hep B, and numerous other vaccines, this one just has an effect on a disease that happens to be sexually transmitted.

I wonder if you would feel the same if there were a preventative medicine to stop HIV in its sexually transmitted form...

I'm not for or against it, because it doesn't affect me or anyone of my gender, but the fact that it immediately sounds like a bad idea just because it's reproductive in nature sounds like a knee jerk reaction to me.

* sits down and waits for the change on his 2 cents*

[mukhtar.livejournal.com]

Oh, and I think they should wait for long term results before making a decision either way. Forgot to mention that.

[patgund.livejournal.com]

The reason for the age barrier is simple - the vaccine doesn't do anything once exposure has happened. So they're vaccinating at that age before *hopefully* exposure happens.

[kishiriadgr.livejournal.com]

"I wonder if you would feel the same if there were a preventative medicine to stop HIV in its sexually transmitted form..."

Yes, I would.

And you do have someone who could be affected: Little Vixen.

Welcome to my LJ, you sure chose a whopper entry to join in!

[mukhtar.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the welcome.

Like I said, I'm not particularly for or against it, as it doesn't affect me, and I prefer to leave the feminine health-care issues up to DV. If she were against it, I would most certainly not have Little Vixen get the vaccine.

Fair warning, I tend to argue the "Flat Earth" point of view when speaking with people taking a more liberal standpoint. Just like I argue the liberal side when speaking with Fundies. Makes life more interesting when playing devil's advocate. Also helps me and others develop our own beliefs more thoroughly.

[desert-vixen.livejournal.com]

Unless they come up with something bad, I want her to have the vaccine. But women in my family have HAD cervical cancer. And uterine cancer. And ovarian cancer. (But not, surprisingly, breast cancer.)

As far as vaccinating everyone else, I'm not sure where I stand on making it mandatory, because I do see the issues on both sides. I do agree with mahogany down below that once again, we're putting all the responsibility on the women. And that does bother me.

DV

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Actually I wound up discussing vaccines with my "parent making medical decisions" hat on, so it's on the other journal:
http://selenite.livejournal.com/147912.html

I think the analogy to the HPV vaccine is clear. Given our family medical history of autoimmune disorders we won't be getting the kids any vaccines we're not convinced is necessary.

Fortunately for our daughters we're not going to be inflicting the "honour" meme on them, so that's not an issue for us directly. Safety, that we'll worry about.

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Oh, data point--I'm pretty sure parents can claim a "conscience" exemption from the vaccination by filling out a form. We did that for our kid and he's in public school without the vaccinations. (With the plan that once special ed gets his speech skills up to speed he gets homeschooled)

[desert-vixen.livejournal.com]

There is.

DV

[electorprince.livejournal.com]

I'm really of no opinion on it whatsoever. The Army has been force-feeding me vaccinations and immunizations even before I signed away my own rights, without regard for choice except under the umbrella of allergies to the vaccine itself (which I don't have). Precedent for the removal of choice as an option has existed seemingly forever. I can't generate enough empathy to care either way, as I fear I lack the frame of reference.

[mahogany.livejournal.com]

I've been trying to write an entry on this issue, but I keep getting too upset.

Even putting aside the false security of the vaccine (the vaccine will give protection against certain strains of HPV, but not all), and the safety concerns, this is truly repugnant.

This vaccine is in no way analogous to the highly contagious diseases that we normally vaccinate against. I'm generally pretty anti vaccine anyway, but presumably vaccinating kids against diseases like Diptheria, which could spread like wildfire in a classroom situation and is very difficult to treat, is whole world away from vaccinating against an STD, which is spread by intercourse.

Further, we're talking about eleven year old girls here. What kind of a message are we sending them (yet again)? Just because women are the ones that are at risk for developing cervical cancer as a result of HPV DOES NOT MEAN we are SOLELY responsible for its prevention, and preventing the spread of the disease. Whatever happened to education? Whatever happened to options? Heck, if the government is really that concerned about the cervical health of young women, why not make the vaccine available without parental consent, so young girls who are sexually active can access it if they wish?

In all honestly, I can't see this lasting. Govenor Perry is already getting tremendous pressure to rescind the ruling.

[letter-d.livejournal.com]

First things first:
The supposed link between MMR vaccines and increased incidence of autism and irritable bowel disease are tenuous at best. Likewise, the worries regarding thimerosal in influenza vaccines are largely an artifact of very badly informed media-drones stirring up an even worse informed population of consumers.

That said, I will address the medical aspect of this -- I'm still too winter-weary for arguing politics...

Yes, prevention through immunization is one of the primary weapons in many public health battles against disease -- and love it or lump it, grade-school immunization has worked splendidly against killers like polio and tuberculosis -- WHICH ARE BOTH TRANSMISSIBLE BY AEROSOL MEANS. On the whole, HPV is found to not be readily transmissible by contact-free methods.

Now, be aware -- I think ANYTHING that is able to reduce rate of HPV-related cervical cancer is *fantastic* -- but I don't think elementary school inoculation is the answer... especially in light of how very new this vaccine is. While not necessarily bad science as such (skirting damn close, but not quite over the edge,) this whole idea gives me a bad flashback to the fallout from widespread DES use -- yikes!

Further conversation on this topic in the public_health community.

[goreism.livejournal.com]

People have already pointed out that there are exemptions for "conscientious objectors" and the reasons for giving it to middle schoolers. But I think it's worth pointing out that the rationale for mandatory vaccinations is the whole positive externalities aspect of it: refusing to get the polio vaccine is a lot easier if most other people are vaccinated. Not making such things mandatory, in general, gives people an incentive to "free ride."

[vanatru.livejournal.com]

Boy howdy...took be about 2 minutes to decide what tac to approach this on.

As one of characters in my current WIP would say.

"But, your just a woman, what would you know about what's best for you? Leave the decisions to the men."

It's one thing for military folk to get the manditory pricks and pokes.......it comes with the job as a beni.

As for the government knowing what's best for you and yours? If you have nothing to hide or fear, why would your protest?

Now, after you get your shot, please step over to the counter and sign up for the purity dance, and then you'll be next for a female genital mutilation and collaring. Don't forget your burkha ok?

Oh wait, your hispanic.......did you bring your green card? "Hey Herb, don't include her in the survey. She's one of them."

for the sake of child sex abuse survivors could be a very good thing

[electricvelvet.livejournal.com]

when I initially heard about the vaccine and the age they were talking about various jurisdictions having it given, it gave me pause for many of the erasons listed here.

However, having had a few months to mull it over, I've changed my mind. I'm sure many of you will be upset by this but I think, assuming the vaccine is safe, that vaccination for it is a good idea.

The reasons I think so are twofold.

I come from and known quite a few people who do to, very dysfunctional families who a were in many ways, a danger to us as kids. As some parents engage in sexual abuse of their kids. If this can protect abused daughters from getting an infection through any sort of forced sex, wiether incestual or rape, I'm all for it.

Also, if a kid is being sexually abused she might engage in sex without the parents knowing.

2. I actually was exposed somehow to HPV before anyone knew much about it. I had to have an operation, when these were very new, in mu mid twenties, for dysplasia caused by the virus. I would have loved to have been able to receive a vaccine for it before that infection occured.

Now if they could just vaccinate against herpes simplex 1 - the cold sore we'd be onto something.

The heck with dignity and honour in other's eyes (something only the non-abused can afford). I'd rather have been protected from the cascer causing virus and *not* have had to have someone shoot a laser (that sounded distressingly like a shopvac) up my vagina, thank you very much. he was a good doctor but still. I'd rather any children i had be protected from the risk.

You can always get your honour and dignity back later.

Re: for the sake of child sex abuse survivors could be a very good thing

[kishiriadgr.livejournal.com]

I mentioned my hate of the word and concept of "honour" in my post.

However, you also make a very good point, more sensible than most, I think.

I'm somewhat less opposed if I know parents can opt out of it. My cousin Patty was able to opt out of her daughter's getting mandatory vaccinations by claiming to be a Christian Scientist, which she isn't, she's just a natural medicine freak.

I still don't like the idea of government telling me how to raise my kids. This is why americanstd favours private schooling, but that's just trading in one nanny for another.

Gov't vs private nannies

[selenite.livejournal.com]

. . . and why we like homeschooling, if we can make it work.

Re: Gov't vs private nannies

[kishiriadgr.livejournal.com]

I know you and celticdragonfly are exploring all options. I've read about parental educational co-ops, where different parents teach different courses. Any chance of that situation arising? For me, I can teach English, history and French but I'd certainly need someone else for math and science, for instance.

Re: Gov't vs private nannies

[selenite.livejournal.com]

That's something we've thought of but we don't have any local parents to exchange with yet. When they're older we'll probably be trying to make contacts with other local homeschoolers.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

The potential transmission through non-consensual sexual contact is my strongest argument for making it as mandatory as possible.