A bill that would specifically have prevented state government from mandating vaccinations was rejected by legislative leaders for consideration in the coming session. That was the right move, but sadly it will fuel the unjustified paranoia about government efforts to guard the populace’s health.
Rep. Doug Thomas, R-Ripley, proposed the bill. “There’s conflicting information being given to the people of Maine as to what our rights are when it comes to being vaccinated,” Rep. Thomas told the legislative council. “And if we don’t have the right to control our own bodies, what gets injected into our bodies, what rights do we have?”
State officials have maintained that vaccinations — whether for the H1N1 virus or other maladies — are voluntary. But the Maine Coalition for Vaccine Choice fears that if the virus begins to cause widespread illness and perhaps death, the state may reverse that policy.
“Vaccination is an invasive medical procedure and as such, decisions on vaccinating should be made on a case by case basis according to the health needs and risks of the individual,” the organization states on its Web site. “Your vaccination decisions should be made in your doctor’s office be-tween you and your physician, not in Augusta, Atlanta or Washington by legislators and non-elected officials.”
That view is reasonable enough, but those opposing mandatory vaccinations should consider the nature of pandemic infection and the responsibility government has for public safety, as well as the way vaccinations would likely become mandatory.
The 1918 flu pandemic killed between 20 million and 40 million people, more than died in World War I. If the H1N1 flu, or some yet unimagined virus, begins to decimate the population, government must retain the power to protect people. It may act to quarantine certain areas and restrict travel. It may act to require proof of vaccination to enter schools or public places. Neither is unprecedented. Currently, public grade schools and state universities require proof of vaccinations against some diseases before admission is granted.
State law allows the governor to declare “an extreme health emergency,” which would empower him or her to take extreme measures. But it is hard to imagine any scenario — setting aside any Big Brother-inspired paranoia — that would have the governor tapping this power with reckless or bad intent.
Just as the state mandates that drivers have insurance for their vehicles, and that dog owners vaccinate their pets for rabies, there may come a time when a vaccination becomes essential. Preemptively removing that power is short-sighted and has the potential to put the public health at risk.