Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly the reason why mandates are unethical and wrong.
As has been said to you 1,000 times, nobody is being forced to be vaccinated. Don't agree with vaccination, by all means, homeschool your kids as you see fit.
As has been said to you 1,000 times, nobody is being forced to be vaccinated. Don't agree with vaccination, by all means, homeschool your kids as you see fit.
As has been said to you a thousand times. It is not a choice when the consequence involves losing access to public education. That is coercion. Not a choice.
As has been said to you a thousand times. It is not a choice when the consequence involves losing access to public education. That is coercive. Not a choice.
I don't think choice means what you think it does. Choice is to have an option, parents do have options, whether you like those options is irrelevant.
Most of these anti-vaxxer folks all live clustered pretty closely anyways, might as well get the whole band together and start your own large group homeschooling units, filled with mirth, lots of learning and disease swapping.
RI has decided that protecting the individual is just as important as protecting the vulnerable who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons.
.
Hi Suzy, I have read and appreciated just about every post you've made in this massive thread. I've rep'd you, I've admired your knowledge on the topic, and I'm impressed that you have the patience to continue to post rationally and calmly.
I am very curious though, as to why you feel RI's HPV law is a good one. I'm not normally one to fear the proverbial slippery slope, but if states are allowed to make laws strictly "to protect individuals," outside the realm of public health, that greatly concerns me. There might be no end of governmental intrusion if citizens allow states to have that much power.
If someone truly believes that states should be in the business of "protecting individuals" (aka "saving us from our poor choices"), there would be hundreds of more dangerous concerns to start with than HPV. So I really am baffled as to how anyone can rationalize this law.
Total BS. That's not a free choice. it's extremely coercive. And there is absolutely no valid reason to ban children from the classroom for not having a vaccine for an STD.
Why would any parent be coerced into giving his child a vaccine that the parent truly believes is dangerous? No one is going to forcibly vaccinate that child.
If the parent decides to vaccinate in order to send the child to public school, he has really decided the vaccine is not dangerous - that the benefit of public school outweighs whatever he perceives the risk of the vaccine to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Thank you for sharing your source. I still think that taking a cautious approach is best when faced with reports of serious side effects. In the case of HPV the risk from cervical cancer is very low with routine paps so forgoing the HPV vaccine until safety can be assured make a lot of sense to me. It is still a choice for people in Japan to get it but is not mandated. I think it should remain a choice in all 50 states as well.
Please tell me what effect routine Pap smears will have on the rates of anal cancer, penile cancer, and throat cancer due to HPV.
While Japan is twiddling its thumbs about the HPV vaccine, people are being infected with high risk strains of HPV.
Japan does not do a very good job with Pap smears it seems. Article from Japan, 2010:
"Japan has a long history (50 years) of cervical cancer screening, and cytological screening programs have reduced the incidence/mortality of cervical cancer by 70%. But, recent cervical cancer screening coverage is ∼24%. Modeling suggested that vaccination of all 12-year-old girls would reduce cervical cancer cases by 73% in Japan."
Of course, those girls are not getting vaccinated now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Not sure what your point is, Juram. A few unstable individuals do not represent the views of the whole. There are extremists on both sides of the issue. The vast majority on both sides are just regular people trying to do the best for their children.
Are we seeing any reports of pro vaccine individuals or groups stalking anti-vaccinationists?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Exactly the reason why mandates are unethical and wrong.
We are talking about choice, are we not? Doesn't that include the choice to vaccinate if you feel the benefit of attending public school outweighs the tiny risk of being vaccinated?
I don't think choice means what you think it does. Choice is to have an option, parents do have options, whether you like those options is irrelevant.
You don't understand the difference between choice and coercion, clearly.
Quote:
Most of these anti-vaxxer folks all live clustered pretty closely anyways, might as well get the whole band together and start your own large group homeschooling units, filled with mirth, lots of learning and disease swapping.
You do realize that homeschoolers don't stay home, right? You'll bump into them in restaurants, stores, libraries, parks, museums, etc. Good luck with that.
Are we seeing any reports of pro vaccine individuals or groups stalking anti-vaccinationists?
I don't know. I 'm not particularly interested but those who favor mandates without exemptions for things like HPV are extremists in my book.
Quote:
We are talking about choice, are we not? Doesn't that include the choice to vaccinate if you feel the benefit of attending public school outweighs the tiny risk of being vaccinated?
We are not talking about choice. We are talking about coercion. Big difference.
Hi Suzy, I have read and appreciated just about every post you've made in this massive thread. I've rep'd you, I've admired your knowledge on the topic, and I'm impressed that you have the patience to continue to post rationally and calmly.
I am very curious though, as to why you feel RI's HPV law is a good one. I'm not normally one to fear the proverbial slippery slope, but if states are allowed to make laws strictly "to protect individuals," outside the realm of public health, that greatly concerns me. There might be no end of governmental intrusion if citizens allow states to have that much power.
If someone truly believes that states should be in the business of "protecting individuals" (aka "saving us from our poor choices"), there would be hundreds of more dangerous concerns to start with than HPV. So I really am baffled as to how anyone can rationalize this law.
Thank you!
In my view, RI's method is just a broader approach to public health, not outside of it. In the long run, a decision not to vaccinate a child against HPV does affect others in the community, especially when the current social milieu is much more relaxed toward sexuality and multiple lifetime partners are probably the norm rather than the exception. Parents who expect a child - male or female - to stay a virgin until marriage and marry a virgin have their heads in the sand.
If we are going to only include vaccination against diseases that can be transferred in the classroom, why mandate tetanus vaccine? You do not catch tetanus from another person.
If the HPV vaccine were as dangerous as some try to portray it I would feel differently. The truth is that it is actually very safe and highly effective.
I think that in the course of discussing mandates we have lost track of the fact that we give all vaccines to protect the recipient of the vaccine, too.
You don't understand the difference between choice and coercion, clearly.
You do realize that homeschoolers don't stay home, right? You'll bump into them in restaurants, stores, libraries, parks, museums, etc. Good luck with that.
Wow, really? You haven't mentioned that 100 times
Minimizing contact 8 hours a day in class is a pretty good start. It also makes sure that parents have a choice to send kids to school if they're immune compromised.
We'll also see how strongly parents actually feel about vaccination when their trendy principles actually require action. I expect when they can't have their kids "hide in the herd" they'll step up and protect them.
Frankly hearing from some of the folks on here, I would hope the most anti-science of the posters homeschool because there are some wacky approaches being espoused (and presumably taught to kids).
Nobody has answered my question about how "choice" advocates could possibly tolerate standardized curriculum anyways... Shouldn't you WANT to choose what science your kid gets corrupted by?
So get your vaccinations and quit trying to play god with others...you and your's will be protected so there's no threat to you!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
