tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4688127821648957369.post5229238866036836736..comments2023-04-11T16:41:35.761-07:00Comments on this child of mine: Teens on Gardasil: What do they think?this child of minehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11951884396342600041noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4688127821648957369.post-22518684396660859842011-11-07T17:19:13.098-08:002011-11-07T17:19:13.098-08:00But it's doing far more than allowing professi...But it's doing far more than allowing professionals to provide help. It's allowing 12 year olds to get the vaccine. I also don't think that 12 year olds should be able to consent to the pill without parent's consent. 16, sure, but 12 is too young. I understand that this has to do with the proper timing of administration of Gardasil, but again, parents' decision. And I don't buy the need for this law because of the fear of discussing Gardasil with parents. As any doctor will tell you (and the concerned parent) it is supposed to protect against some STDs, yes, but also cervical cancer later in life, which, as a parent, would be the more compelling reason to get it anyway.this child of minehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11951884396342600041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4688127821648957369.post-9166380650300360382011-11-07T16:26:53.133-08:002011-11-07T16:26:53.133-08:00My opinion is that most 12 year old children also ...My opinion is that most 12 year old children also do not have the maturity to make good choices about sexual activity. And most 12 year olds are not sexually active. But some active, whether they are wise enough to make good choices about that, and some of them that are active may not be able to discuss it all with their parents. So the government is allowing medical professionals to give some of these kids some help, more than it is mandating that 12 year olds make medical decisions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4688127821648957369.post-77359457655078570532011-11-07T14:10:29.566-08:002011-11-07T14:10:29.566-08:00The law represents a government action to take a m...The law represents a government action to take a medical decision away from parents and hand it to a child. I understand that the child would be making this decision in consultation with a healthcare worker, and in most cases their parents, but according to the law, the child is ultimately in charge of the decision. I do not believe that most 12 year olds are mature enough to make this final decision. Furthermore, I do not agree with actions that undermine a parents' role to make medical decisions for their children without a clear, imminent presumption of medical danger. Certainly there are instances when doctors and others must legally intervene to protect a child, however I do not feel that the administration of a vaccine warrants such action.this child of minehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11951884396342600041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4688127821648957369.post-24293569368019881482011-11-07T13:22:06.433-08:002011-11-07T13:22:06.433-08:00This_Child, I don't understand your reasoning ...This_Child, I don't understand your reasoning that this bill/law represents the government making the choice for your family. The way I read it, the law is about allowing the child to make a choice, sometimes independently of the parent's wishes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4688127821648957369.post-48211005005234940732011-11-05T14:43:12.286-07:002011-11-05T14:43:12.286-07:00Hi Valerie,
I recently commented that my 9 year ol...Hi Valerie,<br />I recently commented that my 9 year old has to be reminded daily to brush his teeth. So three years from now he's going to make medical decisions? And, yes, talking to teens about it was very enlightening. It was interesting to me, for example, that the vast majority of kids in favor of the law were from higher income homes, with more access to better information, better healthcare, and seemed to come from a more "progressive" environment. One girl told me that she had been encouraged by her parents to go on birth control. She had discussed with her doctor, did a fair amount of research, and decided this was not the best choice for her. Her position on the Gardasil law was that teenagers were capable of making informed choices, and "rising to the occasion" to take responsibility. However I don't think she represented most teens. I think at the heart of the issue is the removal of parents from the decision altogether, which I see more and more in all sorts of decisions that involve children. My feeling is that, unless there is certain and immediate danger to a child, the government has no place in these personal, family decisions.this child of minehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11951884396342600041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4688127821648957369.post-445704387456743472011-11-04T08:12:12.674-07:002011-11-04T08:12:12.674-07:00Pre-teen and teenagers do a lot of things without ...Pre-teen and teenagers do a lot of things without parental permission or awareness. They drink and/or do drugs and some are hospitalized and die because of it. If the state allows this vaccination without parental permission or awareness, who is legally liable for some of the side effects and death that have happened because of this particular vaccine? Should parents have to foot the bills--some girls have had post-vaccination reactions that seem like there will be long-term disabilities. Will a parent be able to respond quickly enough, if the child has a reaction to the vaccination? Might their state-mandated ignorance at an ER delay appropriate treatment? I would think that the state should be made liable for any health related effects of this vaccination, if parents are kept ignorant. I applaud your dialogue with teens about this issue. They have some very thoughtful comments.Valerie W. McClainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14926776029719391924noreply@blogger.com