|
Talking Points: The HPV Vaccine 2/12/2007
By Penny Harrington CWA urges lawmakers to resist mandating this vaccine.
- It is a governmental overreach. Bills being introduced to mandate the Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for young girls prohibit any female student from enrolling in the sixth grade unless she has received the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. While there is no objection to the new vaccine that protects against certain strains of HPV, a sexually transmitted disease (STD) that can cause cervical cancer in women, proponents of the vaccine wrongly wish to compel every young girl from 9-11 years old to be vaccinated before she attends school. Clearly, a mandate that 11-year-olds receive an immunization for an STD as a prerequisite for school attendance is an overreach by the state.
- A family decision, not a state decision. Because HPV is spread only through sexual contact, no child is going to be infected with HPV by sitting in a classroom. Therefore, this vaccine should not be listed among those immunizations required for school attendance. Even an opt-out clause is merely the state placing an improper burden on the parents who will feel they must follow the general guidelines of the law rather than search out a way to object on moral or religious grounds. This must be a family's decision, not the state's.
- State delegates and senators are not doctors. Fighting cervical cancer is important, but physicians and parents are the appropriate authorities in this vaccination decision, not state delegates and senators. This is particularly true for immunizations against a disease that is spread through sexual contact and can be avoided through abstinence from sexual activity. The nature of the vaccine and its protection against some forms of HPV necessitates a discussion of sexual matters - issues that may not yet be appropriate for the young girls targeted by HPV vaccine mandates. The introduction of sexual topics is best handled by parents when they feel their children are ready.
- Mandates mean big money. Merck & Co., Inc., the vaccine's developer, stands to reap millions of dollars through state mandates (the vaccine reported cost upwards of $360 per three-injection regimen). Our school enrollment requirements should not serve to subsidize Merck or any pharmaceutical companies by mandating that preteens be immunized against a disease resulting from sexual activity.
- The HPV vaccine offers false security. There is concern that a vaccine involving STDs may give those receiving the immunization a false sense of protection against such diseases, particularly if they are not adequately informed about the vaccine's limitations. It is important, but unfortunately not required, that recipients receive a strong abstinence message so that they understand that the only real protection from the broad range of STDs comes from refraining from sexual activity prior to marriage.
- The American College of Pediatricians agrees that legislative mandates are inappropriate. The American College of Pediatricians released a statement on January 22, 2007, showing their support for the HPV vaccine but their opposition to measures that would mandate such a vaccine. It reads, "The American College of Pediatricians is opposed to any legislation which would require HPV vaccination for school attendance. Excluding children from school for refusal to be vaccinated for a disease spread only by penetrating vaginal intercourse is a serious, precedent-setting action that trespasses on the right of parents to make medical decisions for their children as well as on the rights of the children to attend school. In addition, this vaccine prevents a disease which is exclusively sexually transmitted; mandating it as early as 9 years of age places the medical provider in an ethical dilemma. First, the administration of the vaccine requires explanation to both the parent and the child. Parents may have chosen not to introduce the subject of sexual activity to their nine year olds due to their physical and emotional immaturity. Also, most 9-12 year old children are not sexually active; many have not entered puberty. Forcing a parent to forsake his/her better judgment and discuss this information with the child would be inappropriate and unnecessarily intrusive."
- Four words: Possible Negative Side Effects. The Washington Times reports additional concerns about negative side effects from the vaccine reported in 20 states. The article quotes Vicky Debold, health policy analyst for the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), who notes, "Young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness, temporary loss of vision and some girls have lost consciousness during what appear to be seizures." NVIC is a nonprofit watchdog organization that was created in the early 1980s to prevent vaccine injuries.
- Cancer screenings are curbing cervical cancer. The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) notes that cancer screening through annual pap smears has curbed the instance of cervical cancer significantly - 74 percent between 1955 and 1992. NVIC President Barbara Loe Fisher notes that many parents are opposed to the HPV vaccine. "Parents are becoming more concerned about the sheer number of vaccines kids are getting these days," says Fisher. "In the 1980s, U.S. children got 23 doses of seven vaccines by age six. Today, they get 48 doses of 14 vaccines in the same period. And during the time that vaccine doses have doubled, there's been an increase in the number of children with autism, attention deficit and hyperactive disorder, learning disabilities, asthma, and diabetes, in which vaccines could be a contributing factor."
Concerned Women for America is committed to support, protect and advocate the God-given right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children. Parents know what is best for their daughters and, if given the information about this disease, will make the best decision for the health of their child. Therefore, we urge lawmakers to resist mandating this vaccine.
For more information, see CWA: Suspension of HPV Vaccine Campaign Does Not End Push for Mandates
Penny Harrington is the director of legislation for CWA of California. | Printer Friendly Version |
