Abusive parents and their so-called rights

marjorie says...

Imagine my surprise that my homestate of Texas, firmly controlled by Republicans, is the first to mandate that all young girls get innoculated with Gardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine. Republican Governor Rick Perry's executive order has ignited a fierce protest by Republicans in the state legislature who insist he doesn't have the authority to mandate the vaccination. The row is actually quite instructive for the schism in the Republican party...between those who pander to the evangelicals that want to boil every single decision down to the possibility that someone will have pre-marital sex, or simply fornicate, and those who form their decisions regarding public policy through a more broad based process that seriously considers public health and safety.

The argument against making the drug a requirement for young girls remains two fold: the right of parents to make all decisions for their children, and the charge that vaccinating young girls against cancer will lead them to have pre-marital sex. That last bit is so completely ridiculous not to mention asinine, not to mention grossly sexist, that I won't even address it. What I do want to address is the parental rights argument. Here is Governor Perry's response to his Republican naysayers:

"Never before have we had an opportunity to prevent cancer with a simple vaccine. While I understand the concerns expressed by some, I stand firmly on the side of protecting life. The HPV vaccine does not promote sex, it protects women's health. In the past, young women who have abstained from sex until marriage have contracted HPV from their husbands and faced the difficult task of defeating cervical cancer. This vaccine prevents that from happening.

"Providing the HPV vaccine doesn't promote sexual promiscuity anymore than providing the Hepatitis B vaccine promotes drug use. If the medical community developed a vaccine for lung cancer, would the same critics oppose it claiming it would encourage smoking?
Finally, parents need to know that they have the final decision about whether or not their daughter is vaccinated. I am a strong believer in protecting parental rights, which is why this executive order allows them to opt out."


I must say, I am very pleased to see a Republican take a principled stand on such matters, as I always am. And I'm also amused to watch him have to answer the completely ridiculous charges about premarital sex. The issue I have, though, is the opt-out provisions for parents. Why penalize some young girls for life just because they have ridiculous parents?

While I agree that parental rights are very important, the fact is that too many parents make wrong-headed and at times abusive decisions for their children...decisions that adversely affect their children's futures. I'd like to know why the rights of adults regarding their children are valued so highly at the expense of the future adult lives of their children. Human beings are subject to their parents for 16-17 years, then have another 3-4 times that many years to live as adults. As a society we already take some measures to protect children from their parents and other adults. For instance, child pornography, child labor, sexual acts with children...are all against the law. But I would suggest we don't go nearly far enough. As a society we provide very few safe havens for children who need to escape abusive parents. Many children grow up in abject fear of their parents but have no other place to go, other than the street of course. Why do we think this is ok?

Personally, given the capacity of our society to make sure all young girls are vaccinated with this drug that prevents cancer I would consider it abusive to not do so. If I were an eleven year old girl I would want society to trump my parents on this issue. And as an adult not too many years later I would be incredibly angry if I were one of those few who did not get the vaccination because of ridiculous parents and a society that didn't value my long life over my abusive parents so-called rights.