Angela Cheatham - All Headline News Staff Writer
Tallahassee, FL (AHN) - Should girls aged 11 and 12 be required to be vaccinated against the human papillomavirus, the virus that is known to cause cervical cancer in women?
That’s the question that was put to the Florida House Schools and Learning Committee this week.
The controversy surrounding the administration of the vaccination to girls as young as 11 or 12 years old is largely because the vaccine is only effective if administered before someone becomes sexually active.
Many organizations and lawmakers who support requiring the vaccination view it as a public health issue, no different from vaccinating children against any known disease. Texas became first state to require girls to be vaccinated against the human papillomavirus virus. Each year 14,000 women contract cervical cancer and 4,000 of them dies as a result.
Merck, who makes the vaccine, Gardasil, has been lobbying hard in states across the nation and at least 18 other states are debating whether to require the vaccine for schoolgirls. It is estimated that Merck would make $2 to $4 billion if the vaccine became widely used.
“Should we treat diseases that are sexually transmitted differently than diseases that a spread by a cough or a sneeze?” asked Rep. Shelley Vana, D-Lantana during the pre-vote discussion before the committee.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Ed Homan, R-Tampa, said, “It would be a terrible thing to have to bury the mother of your grandchildren from a disease that you can prevent.”
On the other hand, religious and social conservatives view the requirement as infringing on parental control, suggesting that a vaccine to prevent a sexually transmitted virus implicitly endorses premarital sexual activity.
“We need to give our society … the opportunity to make good decisions on behalf of their children and hesitate and be careful when we think we should slam the long arm of government into those decisions for families,” Rep. Trey Traviesa, R-Tampa.
The original bill would have required vaccinations but would have allowed parents to opt out of the requirement very easily.
When things looked grim for the bill in its original configuration Homan, the bill’s sponsor said, “This is closer to doing nothing.”
He proposed that the council combine both the original bill and Traviesa’s amendment making the vaccine required by 2010 but requiring only that information be sent home until then.
Ultimately, that proposal was rejected and the council voted to require only that middle school girls receive the information about the vaccine. The bill will be presented on the House floor for a vote.
