In connection with our current chapter on Federalism, I thought the ongoing debate over Michelle Bachmann's comments to Rick Perry during last week's Republican debate would make for a perfect discussion topic. Watch this brief four minute video below about the HPV vaccine available for young women.What are your thoughts? Does this vaccination encourage young girls to engage in sexual activity? Is this vaccine crossing the line between states rights and individuals rights?
Please briefly review elsewhere on the internet Bachmann's controversial comments before responding.
HPV Vaccine Video
15 comments:
I do think that the vaccine is effective because it is preventing this cancer from spreading to more females, regardless of the longevity. I agree with Dr. Timothy Johnson when he said that if he had a daughter and she abstained from sex until marriage, you would not know if her husband had some kind of disease that could be transmitted to her when they did have sex, which by getting vaccinated would help prevent this cancerous disease, even if it means to follow up with a booster shot. I do not think it encourages younger girls to have sex earlier because even if there wasn't this vaccine, girls still are going to do whatever they want because they know about STI's and still have sex. Girls are aware of the consequences with having sex, whether it be getting pregnant or getting a disease and that does not stop many girls from abstaining. In a way it is crossing the line because we should have the choice of getting the vaccine or not and should not be mandatory, considering it is our bodies and it seems like by mandating this bill it would take away the freedom of one’s body. I understand they feel like it would help the percentage of Cervical Cancer victims but it should be optional just like any other vaccination like a flu shot. The issue with Bachmann is very controversial because she has yet to come forward with this child who she claims has become mentally retarded from this vaccination. The reality of it is that with any vaccination or shot is that there are always side effects, this being a very unfortunate one, which could make parents of these young girls skeptical to letting their children receive this shot. That is why we should have the choice to get the shot or not that anyone can come back later saying that because of the state government, their child now has a serious condition. If the states do end up making this bill mandatory, I think they should take some more time to review and refine the side effects of this vaccination.
I believe that this is blurring the lines between the government and the family. If a family chooses not to have their daughter vaccinated, then that is their choice. The government should not force families to make a choice that they are uncomfortable with. They may feel that their daughter is not ready to have the shot or have other reasons. It does not matter. If a family does not want their daughter to receive treatment then, unless it is obviously life threatening, they should be able to decline. I also do not think that taking this shot encourages sexual activity in younger girls. Simply because you have "protection" does not mean that you are going to engage in risky behavior. I think that this is comparable to saying that if contraception is available then everyone is going to want to have sex at a younger age. Simple because the shot protect against sexual diseases, does not make it a catalyst for sexual activity. I think that this grossly crosses the government's boundaries in our lives, and should be immediately stopped. The government mandating certain types of health care is wrong and utterly irresponsible. You cannot fit the USA into a category and issue a blanket statement saying, "If you are so and so, you HAVE to receive this." As many doctors know, medicine is not an exact science and forcing this shot on people can cause consequences, especially if they are younger than the recommended age.
I believe it is a good idea for girls to get this vaccine, yet I do not believe it should be mandatory. In my personal opinion, making the vaccine mandatory infringes on individual rights, although I would encourage most girls to get it. However, receiving the vaccine in the sixth grade seems to be too early, and in some ways i think that it would make a girl feel that there is less of a danger to having sex. I am not saying it would completely encourage her to, I am only stating that she may feel less against having it if she did get the shot, especially at such an early age. Although, I do believe if a girl wants to have sex, ultimately she will regardless of whether or not she received a vaccine, or was even on birth control for that matter. I feel that it is the parents job primarily to educate their children about sexual relationships and that they also have the responsibility to decide whether or not their daughter should get a vaccine such as this one. If a parent is truly looking out for their child, though, then they should make them get the vaccine to further protect them, though it should not be an enforced law.
I personally think that the government should not make this vaccine mandatory. I believe this is a more personal issue that should be decided by parents. People should be aloud to make their own decisions and I feel like this is a big one to make. Yes this vaccine is to help reduce the risk of cervical cancer, but with many scary side effects is it worth it? Obviously this is thought to be safe to have because it would not have been permitted, but just take a look at our class. There is only nineteen of us and in our discussion the other day at least 5 people said they had some type of side effect (fainting, getting sick, hard to walk the next day etc.) Also, some of us have not even had this vaccine including myself. When you look at it like that, isn't it a bit scary? I think that this matter is part of your individual rights. I do not think it should be your states decision to tell you that you must get this. I agree with Maggie if the shots only are good for 3 years, there is no need for girls to be getting it in 6th grade. I don't think that this will led more girls into having sex though. With all the risks out there if girls are going to have sex, well they are. It could possibly play a small factor in helping them make their decision to have sex if they are on the fence. But, I really think our government needs to take another look at this and find out all the possible side effects before making any decision. As for Michelle Bachmann, she should not be saying something so controversial if she can not give out the hard core facts. After hearing much about this vaccination, I would not be surprised if it was true. But, as a government official she should know better then to make a comment like that and not back it up. It is just embarrassing to her and I wish she could let everyone know if this is a life threatening issue that needs to be dealt with.
Although I think that the intentions of the man who wants to make this vaccination mandatory are good, I do not agree with this proposal. We live in America where we are supposed to be 'free'. This means that we, as citizens, have the freedom of choice. By living in the United States, we should not be required to get any vaccination unless it is absolutly necessary. The fact that this vaccination has only been proven to be effective for around 5 years is also a concern. Why make someone get a vaccine at a young age if it's only going to last a few years and not even have any benefit to you if in those few years you are not partaking in an activity that would give you the illness that the vaccine is trying to prevent? It is not fair to force someone to have to receive this. I disagree, however, with the idea that it may encourage young girls to become sexually active sooner. I feel that this vaccine is not going to encourage girls to have sex sooner because honestly, they're going to do what they want whether there is a vaccine or not. The thought of getting an STD may be fearful to some but in the long run, that is not going to stop most girls from having sex if that is what they want to do. There are still going to be many girls who get the vaccine and still agree that they want to wait until they are married or much older to do something like that. Girls 13 and over (and ever younger) have minds of their own, know what they want out of life, and know what their beliefs are and getting a vaccine will not change most of that. All in all, due to our natural born freedoms from living in the United States of America, I do not feel that the government should make it mandatory for girls to receive this vaccanation. If they, or their parents want them to get it then it should be made available to them but it definitely should NOT be required.
This video captivated my attention to an extended level. Due to the fact that I am a teenage girl and I would be directly affected by this issue makes me take into consideration my opinions and views over the rights that I hold. In this video they were discussing the different views and opinions of having a mandated vaccination for cervical cancer. I know that there are many different views and opinions, moreover my view lies with the side where this vaccination should not be mandatory. Every person has a right to do whatever they want to their own bodies. Basically what Rick Perry is saying is that he wants every middle school girl to be forced to have this vaccination. I understand that he means well and is trying to protect the lives of those women who might someday suffer from cervical cancer, however he has no right telling someone what to do. It is there own personal body and they should have the decision whether to get the vaccination or not to get it. To support my opinion I believe that the process that we have today for the vaccination should be continued, which involves the choice that you can get the vaccination or you can opt out. Having this vaccination be mandatory is definitely stepping over the boundaries of state rights and local rights. On the other side of the issue many people think that this vaccination is encouraging many young people to have sex. I don’t believe that this vaccination is necessarily encouraging them to have sex however I believe that many teens feel like they are protected from any harm that can be done to them and therefore are having sexual intercourse. I understand that this is a big problem however I think the parents of these teens need to talk to their children and explain what this vaccination is for. This will help decrease the amount of teens who are sexually active and at the same time give them a right have a choice for their own body.
While I do think it is a good idea it is a good idea for girls to get this vaccine, I do not think it should be made mandatory, especially for girls at such a young age. I agree with Maggie that it is pointless for girls to get the vaccine in sixth grade, when it only lasts a few years. However, I don't think it encourages girls to be sexually active, as girls realize the number of diseases and viruses that can be transmitted during sex. Parents should be educated about the vaccine, and then allowed to make their own decision about whether their daughter should get it, without government interference. There have also been many accounts where the vaccine results in conditions such as Bell's Palsy and Guillain-Barre Syndrome. In addition, making the vaccine mandatory is invading individuals' personal rights, as many of the people receiving the vaccine will never even encounter the virus. Though I do believe that overall, the vaccine's benefits outweigh the risks, I do not think it should be made mandatory.
I believe that girls shouldn't be forced into receiving these vaccines. First, its not just one shot, but it is a series of three all within a month of each other, which I can support from my experience. Moreover, the Republican governor shouldn't expect that all families will be able to provide for their daughter the financial support in order to receive these shots. Despite these ideas, I do believe that it is a good precautionary step worth taking, when you are "of age" and entering high school, not in 6th grade.In addition, it also sends out a negative and misleading message to younger girls that its okay to engage in sexual activity at an earlier age since they will think that since they already received these shots that they are protected. Therefore, it is also the parents responsibility to talk to them about this subject and have the "talk" with them if they were to get the shots at a younger age. It also should be up to them when their daughter will receive the shots, not this republican governor. Moreover, it is their right to protect their younger children from the potential side effects that are being spoken of by Bauchmann, whether it is true or false. I can understand both sides of the argument, but I would think that waiting till the recommended age would still be sufficient instead of facing more risk with potential side effects that could occur on children younger than that age.
Although the vaccine is very effective, I do not believe it should be made mandatory. It definitely crosses the line between states rights and individual rights because girls(and their parents) should be the ones to decide what is injected into their body, and what isn't. The girl is fully capable of making decisions on her own, and if she chooses to not get the vaccine, and become sexually active, then she should be aware of the possible consequences. If she has not been educated, or done research herself, than that's her own fault. On a personal note, I received the vaccine a few years ago, and it wasn't bad at all. There were 3 different shots, and my arm was a little sore afterwards. The pain is definitely worth it in the long run, which brings me to the subject of the encouragement for young girls to engage in sexual activity. I do not believe that the vaccine is encouraging. Like Victoria said, some teen girls engage in sexual activity, having full knowledge of the consequences. Cervical cancer is not the only disease that is sexually transmitted. So why should a vaccine be mandatory for one kind of disease, when there are many others that girls can develop from sexual activity?
I do think that girls should get this vaccine, even if they do not plan on being sexually active anytime soon. Like Dr. Johnson stated, this vaccine protects you from possible diseases that your husband may carry. The thing I would change is the age at which to receive the vaccine. If the vaccine only last 3-5 years, why should 6th graders be getting it? That means it would stop its effectiveness by 9th grade at the earliest, which is, hopefully, way before girls are even engaging in sexual activity. In conclusion, I am in favor of this medical breakthrough, but believe it should be completely up to the individual to decide if they want to receive the vaccine or not.
I do not believe that this vaccine should be made mandatory for many different reasons. For one, it is an individual's very own choice to stay healthy. The government is only supposed to make sure that all people have the ability to live a happy and healthy life; they are not in any way forced to make sure that this happens. If a young girl wants the chance to prevent this sexually transmitted virus that could later lead to cancer then by all means she should be allowed to do so. But why force her? It is not practical or affordable or really even necessary for many young girls to receive this vaccine. I feel that all young girls should be educated on what this vaccine will prevent and what it will do before their parents and them make a choice to do it.
Sixth grade is also quite an early age to enforce this to occur in. This is not the age that most girls become sexually active in America so unless it is necessary to get the vaccine at this age then no girl should have to go through this. Also by the time that the girls do become sexually active the vaccine may have already warn off and they would need a booster.
Though the vaccine is an extremely important drug that could help prevent a horrible disease, I do not think that every person should be required to receive it. The federal government has no power to get into families business and force them to receive this vaccine, it is not in their power. All families, I believe, should have the voice to say NO.
I do not believe in the government requiring young girls to receive this vaccine for a few reasons. It is currently unknown just how long this shot will be effective, and it might only last for three to five years. Making young girls receive this shot is pointless in most cases because the shot could ware off before they even enter high school and most girls do not become sexually active until a ways after that. It would be a waste of money to give the shot to young girls if it isn’t necessary. There also may very well be some harmful side effects of the shot and I don’t think young girls should be exposed to that risk if they are not sexually active and don’t need the shot yet. Another reason I don’t think this shot should be mandatory is because it is expensive and some people may not be able to afford it. Since there is no money from the government going out to people who need it to pay for this shot, then I don’t think it should be made mandatory. However, this vaccination is a very significant accomplishment in the medical world and can help prevent people from getting this cancer, but I still think that it should be up to the parents or guardians of these young girls whether or not they should be vaccinated. It is up to the parents to decide if this vaccination is necessary for their daughters and should not be forced upon them. I can see why people think that this vaccination can lead to young girls engaging in sexual activity but I do not think that this vaccination necessarily encourages girls to go out and have sex. Ultimately, I do not think that state’s have the right to force me to receive this particular vaccination and that, since it is available, I can go out and receive it when necessary.
First of all I would like to state that I do not believe that anyone should ever be forced into taking a medicine or receiving a vaccine that they do not want to take. If someone does not want to get a vaccine that could one day save their life by preventing a life-threatening form of cancer, it is their own choice. The government should not force them to do it. It is a very expensive vaccine that should not be forced upon those who are unwilling to receive it. People who are unable to afford it simply must make their own arrangements if they wish to take the vaccine. I think that the government needs to step down on this issue. It is infringing upon individual rights. I think that if all states pass this mandate, their will be no limitations on what the government can do to its citizens. I think it would be a serious step in the wrong direction. On the other hand, I do not discourage people who are willing and able to receive the vaccine. People make their own choices and a vaccine that protects you from STD does not give young girls the green light to become sexually active. If they plan on becoming sexually active, they will. The vaccine will not influence them in anyway. It only protects you from one risk, there are many risks a young girl takes when becoming sexually active. So basically I think that citizens should receive the vaccine only if they are willing and capable of paying for it on their own.
I agree with most of my classmates who have commented before me that girls should not be required to receive the HPV vaccine that is available to prevent cervical cancer. The choice to receive this shot should be left to the young girls and their families because this is a personal issue based on lifestyle and decisions beyond the federal government’s control. I do not necessarily think that it is a bad idea to receive this vaccine because you never know what could happen, but I believe that the government is crossing the line by trying to regulate this personal health choice. The idea that this vaccination encourages young girls to engage in sexual activity at an earlier age may only apply to people who are severely ignorant to the other risks of sexual activity because most people are aware this shot only provides protection against one of many sexually transmitted infections. I think that there will always be some girls, whether they have received this vaccination or not, who will choose to be sexually active because most teenagers do not think about the risks and consequences. There will also always be some girls who choose to abstain, and these moral choices are not solely dependent on a shot. I do think that this may be a mature topic for some young girls, particularly those under the age of thirteen, and it is not necessary for them be exposed to an idea that they probably know very little about. Another reason that this vaccination should not be required is that it prevents a disease that is not easily contracted through normal human interactions on a daily basis like diseases such as measles, mumps, meningitis, chicken pox, and rubella. Although Michelle Bachmann’s comments were controversial and not based on fact, I agree with her point that we should have a choice to decide. This vaccine is crossing the line between states’ rights and individuals’ rights.
The medical community has finally found a vaccine that prevents a type of cancer. This is a vaccine that can save the lives of mant women in the United States. Even though vaccine may cause some side effects, the vaccine is worth taking because a few symptoms for a short period of time is better than having the cancer that could possibly take a person's life. However, I feel that sixth grade is too young if the vaccination is going to wear off in a few years. Many sixth graders aren't sexually active and aren't aware of the cosequences. If a child is sexually active at that age, it is because the parents are reponsible. Parents should not be blaming the government mandating the vaccine for their child having sex. The vaccine will only help prevent the cervical cancer when their daughter becomes sexually active. Also preventing one disease that is sexually transmitted is not going to influence people educated on the subject to become sexually active because of there are many other sexually transmitted disease they could get. Overall, I believe the government is only trying to look out for the best interest of the women in the country, but I feel the parents should make the altimate discision to give the vaccine to their children. They are the people responcible for the children and should do what they believe is right and take reponcibility for their actions.
Personally I didn't give much consiideration to the vaccine when I received it a few years ago. The pediatricion who administered it to me has been the same pediatricion I have had for the past seventeen years, so between her and my parents I felt they knew what was best for me, if that meant receiving this vaccine. But now looking back on it I probably would have spoke my mind because I know more about it and the role our government has played in administering it.
I think when Perry passed this vaccine mandate he intruded on the rights implied to the people through the tenth amendment, stating that any powers not given specifically to the states or the federal government are given to the people. The people should be the ones to decide if they would like to receive the vaccine, or the parents for a child 18 years or younger. This, along with a healthcare provider, if the choice people make to influnence their own lives. There must be a line drawn between where the government assists individual citizen lives and where the citizens step up to better their own lives.
Not to mention that this vaccine is administered at the wrong time in a young girls life. With more girls being sexually-active in their late teens and early twenties this vaccine should be administered at the starting age of thirteen or fourteen. I do not think that this vaccine encourages young women to become sexually active because it not prevent the risk of becoming pregant but only prevents them from contracting a STV. It is up to a girls conscience and the guide of her parents and/or the pressure of a guy to become sexually active. I do acknowledge that it probably the best way to prevent cervical cancer although this vaccine does not guarentee it will prevent all cancers, as a girl might have others cancers down the road.
From a political career point of view from Rick Perry I do not think it was wise for him to follow through with this mandate. With the amount of controversy it has caused throughout not only Texas but also the rest of the United States I do not think his poll rates will be very high. Personally, if he became president I would be worried on what type of bills he would present to be passes.
Post a Comment