Inagural event of the
UW-Stevens Point
Civil Discourse Initiative
“A Civil Discourse on Public Vaccination Policy
and the First Amendment”
Sep 17, 2013 - 7 p.m.
(Constitution Day)
Noel Fine Arts Center (NFAC) - Room 221
About the remote control used during this event:
When you entered the auditorium, you received a small remote control. We
will use these controls to collect anonymous feedback at the end of the
forum and we will be providing you with instructions at that time. There will
be baskets into which you can place your remote control when you leave the
auditorium this evening. Thank you!
The First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.
Wisconsin Student Immunization Law:
The Wisconsin Student Immunization Law, Statue 252.04, requires public
school students to be vaccinated against various communicable diseases.
Families can opt out of this requirement by the submitting “a written statement … objecting to the immunization for reasons of health, religion, or
personal conviction…”
Our definition of civil discourse:
Civil discourse is conversation governed by the virtues of intellectual confidence and intellectual humility, expressing proper respect for ourselves and
for those who differ from us.
What is Constitution Day?
Constitution Day (or Citizenship Day) is an American federal observance that
recognizes the adoption of the United States Constitution and those who
have become U.S. citizens. It is observed on September 17, the day the U.S.
Constitutional Convention signed the Constitution in 1787.
Participants in todays discussion:
Christopher Cirmo, Dean, College of Letters and Science
Dona Warren, Assistant Dean, College of Letters and Science
Jim Maas, Wisconsin Libertarian Party
Paul Ehlers, Wisconsin Libertarian Party
Ed Belongia, Marshfield Clinic
Bobbi Bradley, Marshfield Clinic
Don Downs, University of Wisconsin-Madison
For more information visit our blog:
makingourpoint.wordpress.com
Case Study 1: Parents who distrust the science behind
vaccinations.
State Senator Jones has been contacted by a number of school superintendents who
are troubled by an increase in the number of families obtaining personal conviction
vaccination waivers. Many of these parents, according to the superintendents, are
misinformed about the science behind vaccinations and, as one superintendent
expressed, “when it comes to the health of our children and community, we have an
ethical responsibility to moderate the impact of convictions that are falsified by the
best evidence available to us.”
In response to these concerns, Senator Jones has authored a bill modeled on Oregon’s school immunization law, according to which parents who request a vaccination waiver for reasons of religion or personal conviction must provide the school with
1) a signed letter from a health care practitioner confirming that they have discussed
the risks and benefits of vaccinations or 2) a certificate verifying that they have completed an online lesson about the risks and benefits of vaccinations.
Pat Smith, who is running against Jones in the upcoming election, notes that many
parents are skeptical about the objectivity of conventional medicine and see the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control as the public relations arm of the vaccine industry. Jones’
bill, Smith charges, inappropriately requires parents to who oppose vaccinations to
subject themselves to “state-sanctioned attempts at re-education” before they can
provide their children with one of the “basic public services to which they have a right
as taxpayers.”
A voter in Jones’ and Smith’s voting district is confused about the merits of Jones’s
bill and Smith’s objections and has turned to you for clarification. What do you say?
Case Study 2: Parents who oppose vaccinations on religious grounds.
A week after your conversation with the voter, Pat Smith published an opinion piece in
the local paper. Once again, Smith opposed Jones’ bill, but this time Smith advanced
a different argument.
“A number of area parents request vaccination waivers not for reasons of personal
conviction but on religious grounds,” wrote Smith. “The risks and benefits of vaccinations are irrelevant to such parents, because they rely upon a Higher Power to sustain
the health of their families. Nevertheless, Senator Jones would compel these sincere
individuals to watch an online video about those risks and benefits before they send
their children to a public school. Surely that imposes a burden upon these religious
individuals that isn’t shouldered by other parents. And just as surely, the state can’t
impose such burden.”
Once again, the voter is puzzled, and once again the voter turns to you. How do you
advise this voter?
UW-Stevens Point Civil Discourse Initiative supporters:
Academy of Letters and Science
Association of American Colleges and Universities
Classified Staff Advisory Council
College of Letters and Science
Community Foundation of Central Wisconsin
Faculty Senate
Office of Academic Affairs
Student Government Association
The University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point is an
Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Institution