Outside the Bubble: The Vaccination Debate

A recent outbreak of Measles across the United States has re-ignited the heated debate over vaccinations, and the laws put in place by various states that enforce them amongst the nation’s youth.
The current spread of the disease, largely linked to a slew of cases at Disneyland, in California, is now referred to by the CDC as a “large, ongoing multi-state outbreak.” Measles, whose complications can range from mild illness to pneumonia, and in severe cases, death, has brought the vaccination debate back into the national conversation because of the risk unvaccinated children bear to the general public. “Parents who choose not to vaccinate their kids for reasons of personal belief pose a serious danger to the public,” says Jed Lipinski in an article on Salon.Com. What Lipinski is referring to is the concept that due to measles’ incredibly contagious nature, a single diseased child could wreak havoc on the general public, particularly those who have yet to receive their vaccines. According to the CDC, it is contagious enough that if one person has the disease, 90% of the unvaccinated individuals at close quarters with that person will be infected. It goes without saying that we have come a long way from when measles was a threat comparable to that of Ebola, or any other modern virus. While the death rate for Measles Pneumonia was 30% in the 1920s, the current case fatality rate has been closer, if not below .3%.
What makes the current outbreak so polemic, instead, is the debate over whether or not individuals should be allowed to have the right to decide whether or not vaccination is something they want their children to experience. In a recent interview with the Today Show, President Obama was quoted saying, “A major success of our civilization is the ability to prevent diseases that in the past have devastated folks, and measles is preventable.” The President believes that all parents should choose vaccination over running the risk of infection, and he is not alone in endorsing vaccination as the safest method for preventing the spread of certain diseases and viruses. The majority of research has provided evidence that they are beneficial. However, this is where the conversation begins to get murky.
Opponents of the strong stance the majority of the U.S. government fall into two factions. There are those who simply want to maintain the choice of subjecting their children to vaccinations, and then there are those who believe that vaccinations lead to other health risks. Sundari Kraft, an urban mother in Denver, initially opted out of vaccinating her children. “I kind of fell victim to the idea that where there’s smoke, there might be fire,” she said. Since then, Kraft has changed switched her mindset, and is in fact enforcing the idea that vaccinations should be law. Kraft’s initial reaction, however, is a common one amongst low-income parents. Though those less informed point to superstitions of excessive government control, citing incidents like the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, the large amount of those against vaccinations, otherwise known as “Anti-vaxxers”, find their doubt takes root in a select group of scientists, pundits and politicians who directly oppose the idea.
“I’ve heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines.” Senator Rand Paul (KY), on the rumors that vaccinations caused diseases like autism, added also that while he doesn’t think vaccinations are a “bad idea”, he thinks “parents should have some input.” While there is no official data on vaccinations causing diseases like autism, endorsements for the theory from celebrities like Jenny McCarthy have added fuel to the debate’s fire. McCarthy has published multiple books on youth health, often citing her own personal beliefs with regards to vaccination, and her own public statements have ranged from “I am not ‘anti-vaccine.’ This is not a change in my stance, nor is it a new position I have recently adopted,” in the Chicago Sun-Times to “Time magazine’s article on the autism debate reports that the experts are certain ‘vaccines don’t cause autism; they don’t injure children; they are the pillar of modern public health.” I say, that’s a lie, and we’re sick of it,” in a separate piece from the Huffington Post.
Though McCarthy’s stance is often dismissed as noise, what resonates in the points she often brings up is the debate as to whether or not the government should be able to mandate children to be vaccinated. As it stands today, 48 states allow parents to opt out of vaccinations for religious reasons, and 20 of those also permit exemption for philosophical reasons, the latter being the exception that proves more contentious. Mississippi and West Virginia are the only states that do not allow exemption in either case.
The overlying debate stems from unrest over disease, and control, not just within the sphere of public health, but also within politics. Senator Paul possesses a staunch libertarian streak, believing that individuals and their freedom to choose with regards to policies such as vaccination should be a priority. The question, then remains, does individual freedom take priority over the health of the general public?