Sometime in the next four weeks I will welcome my first child, Evelyn, into this world, and she will definitely be getting all of her vaccines. That is the decision her mother and I have made as parents, and it’s a choice that should be ours alone.
In spite of what I perceive as pure ignorance from those who choose not to vaccinate their children, I believe that parents should still have the choice.
California’s proposed amendment, SB 772, strong-arms parents into one choice: vaccination. The bill is a knee-jerk reaction to the now-ended measles outbreak that originated in Disneyland earlier this year. The proposed amendment infringes upon the rights of parents to be, well, parents.
Proposed by Senators Richard Pan and Ben Allen, SB 772 came about due to the growing frustration with low vaccination rates in some Californian communities.
If passed, it would remove the exemption for personal beliefs currently available to parents who do not believe in or agree with vaccinations; some cite religion, others cite preference for natural remedies.
Instead, the only exemption would be medical, and if a parent did not have their child vaccinated for the list of state-mandated vaccinations, which is an open-ended list, they would not be allowed to attend any child care service, private or public school. They would be left with no choice but to home school their children, which to many parents is not a plausible choice.
There have been stories of rising tides of parents sometimes choosing the personal belief exemption because it was easier than filing all the necessary paperwork with a school or going through the process of actually vaccinating their child. That may have held a sliver of truth in the past, but not anymore.
California already attempted to close that loophole in 2012 with AB 2109, which became law in Jan. 2014. It requires a doctor to advise parents who wish to attain a personal belief exemption of the risks posed by forgoing vaccinations. The doctor must then sign a document stating that they have counseled the parent.
The recent outbreak has overshadowed the fact that the law is actually doing its job.
According to the California Department of Health Grade Immunization Results, childcare services, kindergarten and 7th grade students all reported decreases in personal belief exemption use for the first time in five years from 2014 to 2015. The decreases were significant, with kindergartners leading the way at an enormous 21 percent decrease in personal belief exemption rates.
By educating parents and simply making it harder to receive an exemption, California has nudged parents to do what modern science and countless studies have supported for years: vaccinating their children.
Like the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force it to vaccinate its colt.
There are indeed public health risks, as the Disneyland outbreak taught us. And yes, it was most likely due to the very few who chose to fly against the winds of modern medicine. I acknowledge that, while also acknowledging that if there were another outbreak, my child would be better protected because of the choice I will make to vaccinate her.
It is my job to protect her as best I can, but that responsibility does not extend to telling other people what to do with their children.
SB 722 is an overreaction. When my newborn daughter receives her first vaccinations, I will be extremely grateful that she was born in a time where science has afforded her the power of immunity. I hope to still be thankful to live in a state where it is a parent’s choice.