More on vaccines

Evenson did not say whether Walker believes parents should have a choice on whether their children get vaccinated.

The problems Christie (already a known asshole with corruption problems -- let's not forget Bridge-gate) being hinky on vaccines (appointed a gay judge and was happy about Obama helping with Hurricane Sandy, got to balance things out here!) led me to think Gov. Walker was watching gleeful. The current conventional wisdom seems to put him up there though might want to up those foreign policy bona fides. But, if he is going to "not say" here, I'm going to assume that he is for voluntary vaccination.

Here's a helpful history of the vaccine/autism controversy.  To be fair, that summary shows that the truthers here have some presence on the left (see, e.g., Robert Kennedy).  Exemptions to vaccinations tend to have both "religious" and "conscience" prongs here.  Opposition to vaccines go back to the days of John Adams when they first was applied to our shores, into the early 1900s and now today. Life goes on, some things don't.

"for the common good, for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people, and not for the profit, honor or private interests of anyone man, family or class of men."

The reason, according to the original constitution of Massachusetts as cited Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), why government was instituted.  This ruling upheld a mandatory vaccination law, even if there was some dispute over the science of the matter.  The author of the opinion is Justice Harlan, who had a moderate position regarding state power (e.g., joined with various "Lochner" Era rulings but dissented in the case itself), and is not really the Tea Party justice.  The case recognizes the limits of liberty:

There is, of course, a sphere within which the individual may assert the supremacy of his own will and rightfully dispute the authority of any human government, especially of any free government existing under a written constitution, to interfere with the exercise of that will. But it is equally true that, in every well ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand

Such rhetoric can be used too broadly, but when we are dealing with something like contagious disease, it is a lot more appropriate.  As noted here, such forced medical treatment (the rules are somewhat different in respect to minors and there parental rights also enter the picture) would be put to a higher test these days. They still should be met, especially when school attendance is involved; as with health insurance, no person is an island here even outside such broad situations.  Do you home school? Does your child play at a public park with other children?  

The most appealing types are of the Jenny McCarthy variety (like the co-star of Clueless on FOX as a news commentator, she has celebrity cred in areas where of course she really shouldn't, but that's how life works) who think their kids were negatively affected. As one discussion noted, just calling her bad names or questioning her good faith is not the best approach here. They also these days do seem to get the most succor from the Right, the same who put forth stupid anti-ACA arguments that hurts the well being of real people. Including those with pre-existing conditions like autism. They also are selective about choice on health care (see abortion). The same applies to family leave policy (very good article). If you are going to be inconsistent people, the scorn lashed at you is appropriate.

The "right" not to vaccinate -- and it's there nation-wide to some degree -- is troubling enough.  What got Christie et. al. particularly in trouble was their citation to the now clearly debunked possibility that some vaccines are dangerous because they cause autism (if some specific problem is cited).  Science raises its ugly head.  Those who are loathe to be specific at least arguably consistent with their "I'm not a scientist" philosophy about climate change.  But, policy makers need to get informed about science. And, one side still seems more so.

My mom told me some time ago about her bout of whooping cough as a girl, including the hallucinations.  She grew up when polio was still a problem.  The horror blogger I link tweeted about how as someone who is in treatment for cancer, those not vaccinated can be deadly.  The idea of "herd immunity" might seem too much like us being sheep, but living in a society means working toward the common good.  That means that even if a tiny number of vaccinations were deadly, the statistical chance does not really negate the justice of mandatory regimes. 

We need to get past issues that seemed dead years ago.