Perry a No Show at Texas Wildfire Press Conference

Texas Tribune ^ | 9/10/11 | Kate Galbraith and Jay Root

[CharlesWayneCT]

I’m not comparing the vaccines that are mandatory. The argument that is often used against Perry’s Gardisil order is that it is wrong to force young children to get a shot, and that parents should get to choose what vaccines their children get.

That argument is not specific to a vaccine. But in fact, the opponents don’t actually think it is wrong to force young children to get a shot, they simply thought it was wrong for them to get THIS PARTICULAR SHOT. And, they don’t actually think that mandatory vaccine programs with opt-out provisions usurp Parental Authority, they simply think that adding Gardisil to the list somehow “usurped parental authority”.

The argument then being NOT that forcing kids to get shots to go to school usurps parental authority, but that there are certain vaccines that are not absolutely essential, and for THOSE vaccines, requiring them somehow usurps parental authority in a way we don’t want to, while forcing kids to get a MMR shot, which equally usurps Parental authority, is OK because that shot is “more important” for a school situation.

Now, I agree that Gardisil shouldn’t be on the school required vaccination list. I even wrote op-ed articles against Gardisil in Virginia, where Gardisil was ALSO on the mandatory vaccination list (at about the same time as Perry did it). So you won’t find me arguing that Perry was right, or that Gardisil is a good idea for a vaccine list.

But the argument against Perry is that made an error in judgement deciding that Gardisil was important enough to put on the vaccine list. That’s a good argument against him, but it’s hardly a disqualifier for President.

The opponents know that, so instead they make two arguments: That Perry “forced little girls to get A SHOT”, and that Perry “usurped the rights or parents to decide what shots their kids get”.

Neither of which are literally true, because Perry provided an opt-out, and directed that the opt-out be trivially easy, including putting it on-line.

[CharlesWayneCT]

I actually just mentioned that in the other thread. I’m really kind of sorry we got into such a long argument over this, because other than the importance we put on Perry’s actions, I don’t think we are really in disagreement on this point.

And as the next post to yours mentioned, Alaska appears to have a law that allows them to add vaccines to the list without requiring them, which I assume would make them available for funding. I think that would be a great idea, and I mentioned it on the live thread as the better answer to doing an “opt-in” on the mandatory law.

Since I oppose gardisil as a mandatory vaccine, I’ve always argued the point of the law, not the efficacy of the vaccine.