Calgary bishop’s HPV vaccine ban putting thousands of girls at risk: MDs

[Brendan]

What about the virginal wife, who marries a now good and sincere catholic boy who had a one-time, one night stand. She contacts HPV from him and later develops cancer as a result.

That’s why I had my daughter vaccinated.

Yes, I’ll suggest to my daughter that she get vaccinated, about 6 months before the wedding.

That would certainly cover your scenario, would it not?

 

[seekerz]

For the life of me, I can’t see the moral obstacle to the HPV vaccine, particularly if your pre-teens (like most kids that age) could care less about why they’re getting it.

My understanding is that early administration is most effective, so if someone is going to get it, the earlier the better. Those recommendations are not to my knowledge simply based on kids being promiscuous at a young age, but on the way the immune system works.

Either way regular Pap smears are still recommended.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

Yes, I’ll suggest to my daughter that she get vaccinated, about 6 months before the wedding.

That would certainly cover your scenario, would it not?

How about recommending that the man gets tested?

 

[timotheos]

For the life of me, I can’t see the moral obstacle to the HPV vaccine …

There is no direct moral obstacle, other than that one reason it was developed was because there is no way anybody is going to tell anyone at any age not to have sex at any time with any other person for any reason.

That’s how viruses are transmitted, you know.

There is no moral obstacle when you resign yourself to accepting that “kids will be kids” and you just have to protect yourself. It would be far too radical to challenge the status quo, and it would be foolish to try, like this Bishop of Calgary is doing. Jesus would not expect us to oppose a tidal wave of immoral behavior this widespread and deeply pervasive.

He wouldn’t, would he?

 

[ringil]

For the life of me, I can’t see the moral obstacle to the HPV vaccine, particularly if your pre-teens (like most kids that age) could care less about why they’re getting it…

Well, there is none, except that which is manufactured.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

Well, there is none, except that which is manufactured.

There is a moral obstacle, when it opens an encouragement to having sex, because now they are more protective. It is like handing a child a condom (a condom itself is just a rubber balloon, by itself it is nothing, but what sins it encourages, what it opens up is bad

 

[Phemie]

There is a moral obstacle, when it opens an encouragement to having sex, because now they are more protective. It is like handing a child a condom (a condom itself is just a rubber balloon, by itself it is nothing, but what sins it encourages, what it opens up is bad

How much time did you spend telling your kids exactly what vaccines they were getting and why? My kids were simply told they were getting vaccines to protect them from illness, I don’t recall going into detail. I honestly don’t see how this vaccine encourages promiscuity when it protects against nothing but a few specific viruses out of dozens that cause genital warts. All the other STDs are still there, as is pregnancy. I don’t see this as a valid reason for denying the vaccine.

OTOH, considering the risk of the vaccine compared to the risk of cervical cancer caused by these viruses, I think I’d still opt not to have my daughter vaccinated – but it has nothing to do with morality, just statistical probability.

 

[ringil]

There is a moral obstacle, when it opens an encouragement to having sex, because now they are more protective. It is like handing a child a condom (a condom itself is just a rubber balloon, by itself it is nothing, but what sins it encourages, what it opens up is bad

The HPV vaccine does not, in any way, encourage sexual activity.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

The HPV vaccine does not, in any way, encourage sexual activity.

Every decision comes from a rational logic about the risks and benefits of an action, when some of the risk of making a decision (such as sexual activity) are removed, then it is easier (the person is more encouraged) to perform the action. The see-saw swings the other way.

If fear of getting cervical cancer prevents even one soul from sinning in this way, then the mere existence of the vaccine will encourage that soul to sin.

The loss of soul to sin is an infinite loss, even worse than if all the people on earth were to die now. (it would not be as bad as one soul falling to sin).

 

[Not_Sure_1]

How much time did you spend telling your kids exactly what vaccines they were getting and why? My kids were simply told they were getting vaccines to protect them from illness, I don’t recall going into detail. I honestly don’t see how this vaccine encourages promiscuity when it protects against nothing but a few specific viruses out of dozens that cause genital warts. All the other STDs are still there, as is pregnancy. I don’t see this as a valid reason for denying the vaccine.

OTOH, considering the risk of the vaccine compared to the risk of cervical cancer caused by these viruses, I think I’d still opt not to have my daughter vaccinated – but it has nothing to do with morality, just statistical probability.

You’re going to stab your child with a needle without telling them why?

 

[Dawnia]

You’re going to stab your child with a needle without telling them why?

Of course not! The doctors and nurses stab them for you.

 

[Phemie]

You’re going to stab your child with a needle without telling them why?

I would tell them it’s to protect them from illness. They don’t particularly have to know what illness. If I said to my 9 year old daughter ‘this injection will protect you from cervical cancer’, do I really have to go into the detail of how said cancer could be contracted? I didn’t spend much time telling them how they could contract diptheria, polio, whooping cough and lock jaw when I had them stabbed with a needle containing the DPPT vaccine – in fact, I spent no time at all explaining it to my 3 month old.

 

[ringil]

You’re going to stab your child with a needle without telling them why?

I believe the word is inject.

 

[seekerz]

I would tell them it’s to protect them from illness. They don’t particularly have to know what illness. If I said to my 9 year old daughter ‘this injection will protect you from cervical cancer’, do I really have to go into the detail of how said cancer could be contracted? I didn’t spend much time telling them how they could contract diptheria, polio, whooping cough and lock jaw when I had them stabbed with a needle containing the DPPT vaccine – in fact, I spent no time at all explaining it to my 3 month old.

Exactly. Which is why I find that fears of promoting promiscuity by accepting the vaccine are a tad unrealistic.

 

[seekerz]

There is no direct moral obstacle, other than that one reason it was developed was because there is no way anybody is going to tell anyone at any age not to have sex at any time with any other person for any reason.

That’s how viruses are transmitted, you know.

There is no moral obstacle when you resign yourself to accepting that “kids will be kids” and you just have to protect yourself. It would be far too radical to challenge the status quo, and it would be foolish to try, like this Bishop of Calgary is doing. Jesus would not expect us to oppose a tidal wave of immoral behavior this widespread and deeply pervasive.

He wouldn’t, would he?

The reason it was developed is to prevent people from developing cervical cancer from a virus, period. One does not have to be promiscuous to get HPV.

The reason Rubella vaccine was developed is to prevent illness and deformity in unborn babies. Yet it is given to small children. By vaccinating against Rubella, are we somehow encouraging kids to go out and have babies?

The reason the Hepatitis B vaccine was developed is to prevent complications of a vaccine that is largely transmitted via sexual intercourse. Are we promoting promiscuity by giving it to babies?

One of the important early uses of Penicillin was in the treatment of venereal diseases. Was the invention of Penicillin somehow meant to encourage sexual transgressions?

Sure, some of these medical advances decreased fears of certain serious consequences of promiscuity. They also decreased the suffering of countless innocent people. How is that morally wrong?

 

[jmcrae]

… so, we condemn them to illness and/or death for a moment of immature indiscretion. I can’t say that I agree with this logic. Imagine to sorrow of a parent whose daughter becomes sterile, or worse, because the parent refused this vaccine on behalf of the child.

1. The vaccine only prevents one STD, and a rare one at that - not all of them, and certainly not the ones that the girls are most likely to acquire.
2. We do not assume that every girl who goes to our schools is a slut. In fact, we are counting on the fact that most of them are chaste and good.
3. Girls can still ask their family doctor for the vaccine, if they think they are at risk for STDs. This is a private matter between the girl and her doctor, and the Bishop is not forbidding this.
4. The Bishop is not forbidding the vaccine; he is forbidding that Alberta Health Services will come into every Catholic school and vaccinate every Catholic girl, regardless of her wishes or her parents’ wishes, and then send him the bill for it.

 

[Phemie]

1. The Bishop is not forbidding the vaccine; he is forbidding that Alberta Health Services will come into every Catholic school and vaccinate every Catholic girl, regardless of her wishes or her parents’ wishes, and then send him the bill for it.

Er, wait, they can’t vaccinate against the parents’ wishes, can they? We always had to sign consent forms for our kids to be vaccinated, even when it was in the schools. And why would they ‘send a bill’? Isn’t this vaccine free from Public Health? If they come in whatever grade and give MMR or DPT boosters, do they charge the diocese?

 

[jmcrae]

Er, wait, they can’t vaccinate against the parents’ wishes, can they?

Every girl, is what they want the Bishop to give permission for, and having it at school means that the parents are less likely to object to it. The money would come from the Bishop’s charitable works fund and be paid by the school board; that’s why they need his permission.

 

[Phemie]

Every girl, is what they want the Bishop to give permission for, and having it at school means that the parents are less likely to object to it. The money would come from the Bishop’s charitable works fund and be paid by the school board; that’s why they need his permission.

Well, yes, they’d like to vaccinate every girl, just like PH everywhere else would like to vaccinate every kid against polio and pertussis, but they still can’t do it without the parents’ permission.

Maybe I’m assuming too much. Does PH routinely do the grade 4 or 5 & grade 9 vaccinations (MMR & DPT boosters) in the schools just like they do here and in other provinces where I’ve lived? Do they charge for that or is it simply that it’s easier for PH to go do a clinic in the school and vaccinate everyone of the right age rather than to hope that parents to come to the PH office for the required boosters? Don’t they send home a consent form that parents have to sign and send back to the school in order for the kid to be vaccinated against polio, etc.?

 

[jmcrae]

Well, yes, they’d like to vaccinate every girl, just like PH everywhere else would like to vaccinate every kid against polio and pertussis, but they still can’t do it without the parents’ permission.

And how many parents are going to say “no” if it’s being done by the schools, and every other kid is getting one?