It is difficult to draw a line between public responsibility and personal choice when it comes to the children of a nation.‘ This issue has arisen over and over in history.‘ Do parents have the right to beat their children?‘ Do they have a right to withhold knowledge from them about the facts of life?‘ Do they have a right to learn a specific religion in school?
These are difficult questions.‘ We are often distrustful of our fellow citizens as parents, especially given the tales of foolishness which air nightly on the news.‘ But if we start stripping away their rights to make decisions we think are wrong, then at what point do we start to worry that our fellow citizens might decide that we are wrong and take away a decision which is important to us?
And what do we do when the interests of a child’s future health and their future morality are at odds?
Recently in Texas, Governor Rick Perry issued an executive order to the people of the state.‘ It required that female children be immunized against the human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted disease.‘ Because HPV is the main cause of cervical cancer later in life, this should help drastically reduce the incidents of cervical cancer in these children once they grow up and become sexually active.‘ The immunization, added to the list of school required shots, must be administered by the time the girl is twelve for maximum effectiveness.‘ Many other states, including Florida, are considering similar laws, either through executive order or legislature.‘
It is important to note that in all cases, including Texas, a provision is made for parents to opt out of the immunization as long as they sign a waiver to that effect.‘ No one is forcing the immunization on anyone.‘ But many think that even this very strong suggestion is going too far.‘ Most of the Texas legislators are among that group, and two bills are already on their way through both houses to oppose the governor’s order.
The problem is that HPV can only be transmitted by sexual intercourse.‘ And many parents don’t want their children to have sex, until they do it with a spouse.‘ This is an entirely reasonable wish, if a bit overly optimistic, and the parents are entitled to it.‘ Accordingly, they may easily opt out of having their child immunized.
Of course when the girl reaches puberty and joins the 95% of individuals who are having premarital sex (according to a recent study by the Guttmacher Institute), she might then catch HPV.‘ And then, in the future, she might find that she has cervical cancer.
Clearly, this isn’t a smart bet for parents.‘ It is tantamount to focusing discussions of contraception entirely on abstinence (an initiative into which the Bush administration has poured over a billion dollars).‘ Nonetheless, parents should be allowed to make this choice.‘ What is needed is a strongly-worded requirement that female children be immunized, unless parents provide an affidavit that they do not wish them to be.‘
What is needed is common sense and level-headed skepticism of claims of oppression, while still preserving the personal right of parents to make decisions we consider short-sighted.‘ What is needed is what has already been done in Texas, and hopefully will be done in Florida (if the bills make it through the House and Senate, where they have been introduced simultaneously).‘ What is needed is optimism, a vaccine, and a needle.