We’re a bit off topic here discussing the HPV vaccine issue instead of guns. But what the heck. You are probably right about the role of Big Pharma (i.e., Merck) in pushing this legislation. But I seriously doubt they influenced Jerry Brown’s decision in the slightest. I’m generally not in favor of laws that weaken parental authority. However, there are some really horrible parents out there who have some pretty rigid views about morality and religion. In the case of HPV, we are talking life and death. It only takes one incident of unprotected sex with a guy who doesn’t even know he has the virus, and a girl can be condemned to cancer later in life. If a girl aged 12-18 wants the vaccine and her parents refuse, I say to hell with parental rights in this case. I view this the same way as a kid raised in a Christian Science family who wants medical treatment that the religion (or the parents’ interpretation of it) doesn’t allow. I’ve known some exceptionally fine Christian Scientists in all walks of life, but I wouldn’t allow parents in such a familiy to deny medical care to a minor who chooses a different path.

You’re correct, AB499 shifts the choice from the parents to the children, thus removing any need for counsel and/or permission from the parents. But, how and by what circumstances will a child have to make such a choice? This law plain and simply, removes the rights of parents, insinuating that the parents are incapable of making the proper decisions for the health of their child, no matter how much choice the child has or doesn’t have. The decision then is left up to a child and the health official, with no counsel, direction, notice or consent of the parent. Without parental involvement, this law becomes a total dictation by the state when it comes to this public health concern. Without parental involvement, the burden of responsibility is then shifted from the parents to the state regarding this particular public health matter. The responsibility of whether or not a child receives this vaccine can now not be left with the parent and certainly not with the child, but now with the state. As the state will now carry such a burden of responsibility to vaccinate away this public health concern, I’d hate to be that young child in the doctor or nurses office having to make a choice without the consultation from mom or dad.

In regards to the expense of the vaccination, I can only say that I believe the pharmaceutical companies who produce the vaccine applauded Brown’s signing of this bill. Just the fact of the law now removing the third party (the parent) in the vaccination of children, means the probability of increased profits.

How does the law shift rights from parents to the state? It shifts the choice from the parents to the girls. In my book, a young girl’s right not to be exposed to preventable cervical cancer trumps parental rights. I doubt the law will have much effect, since vaccination requires three shots, which are very expensive. Like it or not, girls tend to become sexually active at a much younger age than in my day. Not allowing them to get vaccinated won’t change that. However, somebody did raise an interesting question during morning talk on KGO. If the law empowers a young girl to get vaccinated without parental permission, does it then also allow a girl to refuse if the parents want her to get vaccinated?

Mr. Brown, What’s next? What other rights and freedoms can we transfer to the state of California that we’re not able to do or figure out for ourselves.

In addition, Brown also signed AB131 also known as the CA Dream Act. This law allows, beginning in 2013, illegal immigrants accepted by state universities to receive assistance from Cal-Grants. The new law also makes students who are not legally in the country eligible for institutional grants while attending the University of California and California State University systems. And it permits them to obtain fee waivers in the community college system. This is all at the cost of legal tax paying citizens whose children will be competing to receive these same grants. American citizen students from other states desiring to attend a CA school will have no benefit.

I guess this all sounds fair.