Uncle Sam, M.D.?

As speculation heats up on who will be running for president in 2016, more and more opinions are being dragged into the spotlight for the entire country to see. No beliefs were more heavily scrutinized than the ones on vaccinations as the measles outbreak in California reaches more than 90 people. This debate over the effectiveness of vaccines has brought up another interesting question – should the government require citizens to be vaccinated for certain, or all diseases? Several Republicans made headlines with their views earlier this week, including New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul who both spoke out in support of giving parents the choice of vaccinating their children.

uncle sam vaccination

Mr. Christie, who was on a trade mission to London and presumably trying to strengthen his international portfolio for a presidential run, had his efforts overseas pushed to the periphery of the conversation when he said parents “need to have some measure of choice” in vaccinating their children. Mr. Christie’s beliefs are not uncommon within his party, and that is part of the reason for the backlash he has received, as this message came across as calculated, manipulative political rhetoric, and less about his views on the care of our nation’s children. The statement was later amended by Mr. Christie’s office when they said, “with a disease like measles there is no question kids should be vaccinated.”

Mr. Paul’s views, however, were not as ambiguous. As a libertarian, Mr. Paul believes that parents should absolutely have a say in whether or not to vaccinate their children for measles. Mr. Paul said that while he “[thinks] it’s a good idea to take the vaccine, I think that’s a personal decision for individuals,” which is consistent with libertarian personal freedom beliefs.

The scare over vaccines is one that is rooted in a study done in 1998 which showed some correlation between vaccinations and the development of autism. This fear has persisted and has been falsely amplified, as seen in the 2012 Republican primary elections, when Michelle Bachmann falsely claimed that the HPV vaccine could cause “mental retardation.” The study finding the link between vaccination and autism has since been widely discredited within the medical community, was retracted in 2010, and the author lost his medical license.

There is a growing disparity within the Republican part over these scientific issues, as highlighted in the past with teaching evolution in schools, global warming, as well as the recent Ebola scare that has divided the party between those who have accepted scientific findings and those who are skeptical and slow to react. Possible 2016 Republican candidate Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin is one of those who have accepted the science for what it is, stating that “study after study has shown that there are no negative long-term  consequences…and the more kids who are not vaccinated, the more they’re at risk.”

This issue wasn’t always a political one, however, as in 2009 71% of both Democrats and Republicans favored requiring the vaccination of children. Since then, the percentage of Democrats who support this practice has gone up 5% while the percentage of Republicans has dropped 6%. So what’s the big deal all of a sudden over vaccines? And why can’t politicians come to an agreement, if not for novelty’s take, but for the sake of the nation’s children?

Unfortunately, this is just one example of the bipartisan stalemate that we’ve seen develop in past years where both sides of the isle are looking for anything and everything to fight about and distinguish themselves so that no Red seems Blue and vice versa. Unfortunately, like most issues dealing with science, Republicans are slow to react to the change that is laid out in front of them. While some affluent liberal families are choosing not to vaccinate their children based on the (discredited) idea that vaccines can cause autism, conservatives are simply afraid of government mandates. Having something superimposed onto the citizens infringes on their freedom, thus strengthening the “big government” feel of the United States.

This logic is completely understandable in most cases, and they have every right to fight a government-imposed regulation, but when that regulation is fighting for the good of public health with a platform of strong, convincing scientific evidence, there’s simply no room to fight. If they agree on nothing else for the next two years, the government should agree on protecting the health of the public – now and in the future. Vaccinations for life threatening preventable diseases such as measles should be required, or at the very least presented to the public in an enlightening manner so the decision is clear that there is no decision to be made – just get the shot.

2 thoughts on “Uncle Sam, M.D.?

  1. One thing that really annoys me when people cite evidence for why they choose not to vaccinate their children is because it causes autism. There is no scientific evidence suggesting that such a causal relationship exists – correlation doesn’t equal causation! Plus the 1998 report claiming evidence was fraudulent and invalid. If the government chooses to mandate vaccinations for children (California legislature is considering dropping all exemptions for mandatory vaccination except justifiable medical reasons) it would greatly improve public health. I really like what you mentioned at the end – providing enough evidence so that even those who are in favor of having a choice in the matter of vaccination, will choose to do so on their own accord. This is stronger then a government mandate because people are intrinsically motivated to get the shot. Looking forward to our deliberation on this issue.

  2. “To vaccinate or not vaccinate, that is the question.” I’m glad you chose this topic because this is a nice transition into our discussion forum we’ll be having! I personally have had a connection with this debate and the family decided not to vaccinate at birth but before their son went into kindergarten, he was ultimately vaccinated. I due agree with you in saying that the Republicans act slow to the change in front of them, Liberals refuse, and Conservatives are scared of a mandate. There diseases out there that vaccines can prevent…so why not get a few shots?

Leave a Reply