Should the vaccine for human papillomavirus (HPV) be mandatory?

Yes
No
Resources for this issue
Reviews of this issue

This issue has been approved by whereIstand editors.

Do not use this page to take a stand on this issue.

This page shows the dialogue between users and editors regarding the merits of this issue. If you have comments about the issue's wording, relevance, etc., write them here. Only registered whereIstand members can edit an issue. Users must register in order to participate in all aspects of the whereIstand community.

10/15/2008 9:37:09 AM

Set as news: False

10/10/2008 9:44:32 AM

Set as news: True

9/3/2008 1:00:20 PM

Set as news: False

7/8/2008 11:45:00 AM

Set as news: True

previous version of issue

Should the vaccine for human papillomavirus be mandatory?

  • Yes
  • No
2/6/2007 7:39:23 AM

lose "hpv"

2/3/2007 3:26:53 PM

issue prior to revisions:

Should the vaccine for human papillomavirus, "HPV" be mandatory?
Yes
No
No position or position not known.

2/3/2007 2:50:34 PM

Having just read that Texas is on board for mandatory testing, I withdraw all of my earlier comments as being hopelessly naive, and agree that the issue is ripe for posting. Only quibble is grammatical: either use no commas, or use two commas (before and after HPV).

2/3/2007 1:28:14 PM

That last formulation looks good to me.  (Sorry I missed this issue, will discard mine.)

2/2/2007 1:10:04 PM

I don't like asking "who should decide." It's really asking a more general question that has nothing necessarily to do with HPV vaccine, and we're already developing an issue about it in this topic. Making it mandatory, on the other hand, is the subject of a legitimate public debate. Take this article, for example.

Other vaccines are more or less mandatory (you don't have to get them, but if you don't, your kids can't go to school, etc.). This one may be as well. I think we should move on it, though the "HPV" interjection isn't necessary.

Should the human papillomavirus vaccine be mandatory?

1/30/2007 12:29:52 PM

Well, I hope you guys know what you're talking about here.  I'm going to move on...

1/30/2007 11:10:53 AM

Probably would be better to ask who rather than should it be made mandatory.

1/30/2007 11:03:13 AM

it is at issue right now - the government may make it mandatory.  i was asking a different question than the one posed by vizinertia but it may work to  ask it as he suggested which is:

Who should decide whether a child should be immunized against human papillomavirus, "HPV"?

1) Parent
2) Doctor
3) Government
4) Child

P.S. not sure whether it should be "immunized against" or "immunized for" ...  health gurus?

1/30/2007 10:28:03 AM

Doesn't it jump a bit ahead of the game (and feed into the paranoia of a few) to go straight from "nothing" to "mandatory"? The issue as it will be emerging in the near future is not mandatory, but "Should parents have their daughters vaccinated for human papillomavirus?" Or "Should the government encourage parents to have their daughters vaccinated for human papillomavirus?" Or maybe "Who should decide whether/when a girl should be immunized for human papillomavirus? 1. The government. 2. Parent(s). 3. A doctor. 4. The girl herself." That last option certainly raises some issues for the rights of minors, but issues that seem inevitable in discussing the issue.

1/12/2007 11:55:03 AM

Interesting question and I think it is one that should be asked.

1/12/2007 9:09:20 AM

issue prior to revisions:

Should the vaccine for human papillomavirus, "HPV" be mandatory?
No position or position not known.