Not Getting It . . . On State Compulsion

Here’s a thoroughly unsourced comment (sorry, I have only a couple minutes to write):

The media is hopping onto the bandwagon the the Republicans are anti-vaccine and the Democrats are the Party of Science.

You’ve most likely seen articles complaining that the true anti-vacciners are liberal Democrats: Jenny McCarthy, Marin County, and so on. Their anti-vaccinism is part and parcel of a belief in “natural treatments” and organic food, and a distrust of the “vaccination industry” as a sort of insidious Big Business. But because a few Republicans (Rand Paul, Chris Christie, not sure who else) have expressed hesitation about compelling people, in all instances, to get vaccinated, the media has created a new narrative, that the GOP is anti-vaccine. Articles about Rand Paul publicly getting vaccinated have labelled the action as contradictory and inexplicable.

Is this just about the media taking any opportunity it can to bash Republicans?

Probably not. It seems that it’s much more a matter of a view of State power that says, “anything good, the State should mandate; anything bad, the State should prohibit,” and doesn’t recognize the individual right of conscience as (depending on the circumstances) trumping State power — or, really, even, the validity of the idea of the right of conscience.

Now, in this case, the pubic health consequences of one individual refusing vaccination are small; the public health consequences of large numbers refusing, quite worrisome. While the refusers were a small minority, it was much easier to accept their refusal, especially to the extent that it came out of genuine religious beliefs (e.g., Christian Scientists). But the larger group of refusers now is composed only to a small extent by these true conscientious objectors, and to a much greater extent by the ignorant (what do you call someone whose belief that vaccines cause autism appears to be nonfalsifiable) and the free-riders (who bank on herd immunity to protect them while avoiding the real side effects/risks of the vaccine for their own children).

And while I believe that the grounds for conscientious objection should be very narrow (and I’m talking, “prove you’ve a dues-paying member of a church with these established beliefs and have endured unpleasant consequences as a result” narrow), I understand that others wrestle more with how wide the objection should be, and how much power the State should have — without trying to cast them as “anti-vaccine” or “anti-science,” or being mystified that they are indeed pro-vaccine.

And with measles it’s fairly clear that the disease spreads so rapidly that a decision not to vaccinate impacts those you come in contact with. But remember chicken pox? I remember the vaccine coming out, and the discussion about whether it should be mandatory, or even routine, considering that (this is my memory, perhaps not actual fact) chicken pox prevention would mostly be a convenience for parents who would no longer have to miss work. Should the chicken pox vaccine be mandatory? In some states, here in the US, it is, in others, it’s not — and in the UK (according to an old-ish BBC article from 2010) isn’t not even a standard part of the vaccination schedule.

And from another article on the Deutsche Welle news site, more recently, from 2013: “Measles rise sparks vaccine debate in Germany“:

Measles have has been stamped out in some countries – but not in Germany. A new wave of infection has rolled through Germany, prompting renewed discussion about compulsory vaccinations.
. . .
While measles infections are virtually non-existent in the United States, for example, there have been of late from 122 to 2,308 each year in Germany – some resulting in fatalities. Currently, the virus is spreading primarily in Berlin and Bavaria, with Germany’s Ministry of Health reporting more than 900 cases in the first half of 2013.

The article explains that Germany does not have compulsory vaccines, nor do the Scandinavian countries, and that (as elsewhere, but to a greater degree) parents began rejecting the vaccine in the 1990s. It also quotes their version of Jenny McCarthy:

Michael Friedl, chairman of the Association of Doctors for Individualized Vaccination Decisions, disagrees with compulsory vaccines. Since illness is always an individual process, decisions around it must be left up to the individual, he thinks.

The alternative practitioner is not generally against measles vaccines, rather is critical of administering them during childhood years. In his opinion, measles – like other illnesses that prompt high fevers – serve an important function. For one thing, experiencing such an illness allows children to better understand their bodies. For another, it helps to strengthen the immune system.

Now, the idea that children should get measles to “understand their bodies” is pretty flaky, but, at any rate, the fact that various European countries don’t require these vaccines at any rate indicates that there is a diversity of opinion even among “civilized people” on what the State should demand, and is food for thought.

Other articles on Deutsche Welle about vaccines:
from 2015, “Berlin outbreak blasts hopes of eradicating measles in Germany by 2015“
and “Europe is learning to fear Ebola, while refusing to vaccinate against measles” which says,

But add these fears [about autism] to the general public distrust of doctors, medicines and pharmaceutical companies – which is more pronounced in the southern German states of Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria – together with those who simply forget to bring their child for a follow-up jab and you have a significant number of children who aren’t immunized.

In Germany, the measles immunization rate is 92 percent – in Baden-Württemberg it’s even lower at 89 percent. This might sound like a lot, but it is well below the 95 percent goal set by Germany and other European nations to eradicate the disease by 2015.

Oh, and: