Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Penumbra Rights, Merck, and Texas Pre-teens

Should the government mandate the use of Gardasil

( to prevent HPV) in school-age girls?


christine mullen said...

first and for most i dont believe that they should be able to assume that every pre-teen is having intercourse. even though they are trying to look out for the best intrest of the chidren they are also in it to make the money they put out to do all the expiraminting. i really do feel it would be unjustified for any parent to force their child to get some injection just because it is supposed to protect you from cancer even though no one knows for how long or if it really does at all. i think the only reason that parents are even considering the injection is because the big "C"
word was mentioned and that made them feel uneasy. so as a parent they might feel as if that is the best thing to do to protect their child. From anything bad happening which is their job but injecting them isnt the only way to protect your child from this. Maybe tring to inform your child about the dangers of what could happen if they felt that they were ready to have sex. There has to be away not to feed into this injection and since am not a parent i dont have all the answers but i just really cant support the idea of injecting children with somthing and not having one living person to so yeah having that injection saved my life or even helped to treat it. for me personaly i need to have more people for examples for me to believe this is the real deal.

Jay Mangubat said...

I think it's okay for the government to offer the drug to girls but I don't think that parents should be forced to give the drugs to their children like regular shots are. If the drug helps some girls not to get cancer it will save money and care in the future.

Joanna said...

I think that the government (whether federal or state) should make that Guardasil vaccination compulsory.

Now let me qualify that. I think it should be made compulsory only because I know stupid people like myself, who cannot stand doctors and therefore DO NOT GO...EVER (unless they're on the verge of death itself), would never have it done. They would never be vaccinated even though, like myself, they are aware of the dangers they expose themselves to by not being vaccinated. This is just being stubborn and dumb, but I do think that many people share my sentiments and, regardless of whether you think pre-pubescent little girls are or are not having sex, they should be vaccinated.

Okay. Let me qualify my first statement again. I think this vaccination needs to be made mandatory, however, in addition to sticking a needle into somebody, you need to also educate them as far as (depending on your family's values I suppose) when it's appropriate to have sex and safe sex practices and that, this particular vaccine DOES NOT protect them against ANYTHING BESIDES HPV.

I worry, though, that this measure could be viewed as giving ourselves away to some extent. Brown may have said this in class, but where do we now draw the line as far as our "right" to personal privacy. The image of our parents walking toward us with a tablespoon of some vile smelling medicine and saying "This is for your own good" come to mind. To what extent are we willing to allow the government to decide what's best for us? You could echo my mother and say, "Well, that's what I give up 33.3% of my salary for! So I don't have to think about it” but should you not always be thinking about it? The government should not have to make these decisions, concerning our own BODIES, for us. I should be responsible enough for my own health to let myself be damned uncomfortable for less than ten minutes and go to the doctor every now and again! But, alas, we are not so proactive most of us. And I see this vaccine, which is such a good thing, being used as a precedent setter; a government doggy-door that leads right into our bodies and can be used to attack our very fragile privacy rights...

vishnell said...

I think that the government shouldn’t mandate the use of Gardasil in school-age girls. Like talked about in the article the people who want this should be able to opt in. This should be a choice and not a must have thing. Depending on how young the child is the parent should be able to decide if their child needs the shot and not the government.

You are supposed to get this shot before becoming sexually active. Once getting this shot you can prevent getting HPV. Nothing but HPV. Shouldn’t there be a shot to prevent other things too then? Girls as young as 10 are questioned to be mandatory for this vaccine so if that’s the case is that allowing the girls to think its okay to be sexually active after taking the vaccine? What if a 10 year old gets pregnant or gets something else.

The vaccine should not be mandated because the government shouldn’t be able to invade your privacy or thoughts. Choices are made and opinions are different. This is what makes every family different and have their own beliefs. Parents decide what is best for their daughter.

Edwin genao said...

When it comes to my safety or the safety of my family, I want the police to work on the crime before it happens rather than after the crime happens.
I liked the lady they mentioned in the article named Dorothy Shields. She felt that there are certain young people who do not care about their neighbors and are against all authority. She also said that the young people in her neighborhood feel that they should be able to do whatever they want whether is right or wrong.
I try to do the right thing at all time, I am not afraid of the police.

ZOHRA ALI said...

Hearing the benefits of Gardasil are very promising to many women out there who are skeptical about using the drug for themselves but it comes an even greater question of ethics when it comes to their young teenage “baby” girls. Since the drug is recommended for girls who haven’t become sexual active yet it causes the age to go down to pre teen girls who aren’t the typical crown to begin being sexual active. Putting little girls, and sexual active in the same sentence causes parents to wonder and question why they have to take the drug so early since their child wont be having sex till their married… as they think and would hope their child does so, which usually isn’t the case for teens who are opinionated and do what they feel is right for themselves and not their parents. The myth is out that everyone’s not having sex because statistics show that teens are having sex earlier and need to be protected from these harmful things. The moment something comes out that can help those who are having sex or might be, a riot is stirred and feel that people may be pointing the finger toward their innocent teen since they aren’t having sex. If their could be a cure for Aids before it would be able to spread knowing it’s a sexually transmitted disease many people who be against it, again saying that they know who they are with and are sure they wont be able to get it, but only when millions are killed and AIDS spreads faster will it be a cause that should be taken care of and a cure should be found. Preventing cervical cancer can stop and close its door before it even happens and no one is even thankful for its ability to put cervical cancer to a stop and help the youth of the future. Only when cervical cancer becomes an epidemic will it only be recognized as a problem that should be taken care of, and I think that’s a joke. Shame on all those foolish parents who are stuck in their old aged minds, because you cant stay in the time when they were growing up, times change as well as generations have changed, and they have to get used to putting their child in a generation full of sexually active teenagers with risks that one of them might be in danger of catching a life threatening illness. Its sad to say and make generalizations about teens, and their generation but you cant stop pop culture and other teens from being influenced so you might As well try to find things to protect your teen in the long run rather than the present only.

carolina barberii said...

Hearing that the government would provide free gardasil vaccinations for preteen girls was bittersweet for me. The vaccination, which prevents HPV, has recently been released to the public and as Christine said I haven't seen any success stories of people who used the vaccination to COMPLETELY sway my perspective. That is why I don't think mandating the use of Gardisil for preteens is right. I do however think it should be an option for now until it is proven in the future that this vaccine really works. I'll remain hesitant about mandating the vaccine for all girls until science proves that this vaccination is reliable. For the past year or so I've been skeptical about medications and vaccinations that advertise on TV, we must remember that these are companies out to make money and who is to say what they advertise is what we truly get. These companies have well thought out strategies to reach the public and Gardasil is no different. Once others see that these girls took the risk of taking the vaccination it will probably inspire others to do it too.

Well overall I believe that if this vaccine proves to rid us of HPV that would be great. But until that is proven to me I wouldn't go out and get it myself. I still can't help but look at Gardasil as a company trying to make money but only time will tell if they measure up to their standards.

Anonymous said...

I believe that if this shot will help keep children safe in the future, it should not be fought. Just like polio these can be life threatening diseases and just because your child does not have it, or so you think, would you want to risk your child's life because of a fear she/he may be participating in intercourse. We must prevent this disease from hurting children, while at the same time educating them about the dangers of sex. I support the idea of trying to help children in any way possible.
Michelle Asciote