Mandelbaum: Vaccines Work. That Wasn't The Debate.

By Jennifer Mandelbaum, NH Journal

When HB 1811 came before the legislature, too many of my colleagues took a shortcut.

Instead of debating the bill on its merits, they labeled it “anti-vax” and moved on. That label may have been politically convenient, but it was not accurate, and it avoided the real issue.

Let me be clear: vaccines work. As a public health professional, I believe they are one of the greatest tools we have to prevent serious illness and protect vulnerable people. That was never the central question before us.

HB 1811 was about whether the state should require certain vaccinations as a condition for attending public school and child care. In other words, it was about government authority, not whether vaccines are effective. You can support vaccines and still believe it is appropriate to ask how far government power should extend. Legislators have a responsibility to examine the limits of state power, especially when it involves medical decisions affecting families and their children.

What was especially disappointing was how quickly families with questions were dismissed. Most parents who delay or decline vaccines are not extremists or anti-science activists. They are hesitant. Some worry about the number of vaccines recommended. Some distrust pharmaceutical companies. Others were confused or frustrated by changing public health guidance during COVID-19. Many simply want more information before making decisions for their children. We may disagree with them, but calling them “anti-vax” shuts down conversation instead of building trust.

Public health only works when people trust the institutions giving advice. Over the past several years, that trust has taken a hit. Whether fair or not, many people feel government and public health officials have not always communicated clearly or consistently. Pretending those concerns are illegitimate will not make them disappear, and dismissing them outright only deepens skepticism.

None of this means school vaccination policies lack purpose. Schools are places where diseases can spread quickly, and immunization requirements were adopted to prevent outbreaks and protect children who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. That goal matters. Protecting vulnerable children matters.

But protecting public health and respecting individual freedom are not opposites. They must be balanced carefully. When the state requires a medical intervention as a condition for participating in public education, it is reasonable for lawmakers and citizens to ask whether that requirement is justified and whether there are other ways to achieve the same end.

HB 1811 ultimately did not pass, and reasonable people disagreed about whether it was the right policy. But reducing the debate to name-calling did not serve the public well. We can strongly support vaccines while still having an honest conversation about mandates. We can protect vulnerable children while also respecting parental concerns.

If we want public health policies that endure, we need trust. And trust begins with listening instead of labeling.

State Rep. Jennifer Mandelbaum (D) represents Portsmouth and Newington in the New Hampshire House of Representatives. She wrote this for NHJournal.com.

This story was originally published by the NH Journal, an online news publication dedicated to providing fair, unbiased reporting on, and analysis of, political news of interest to New Hampshire. For more stories from the NH Journal, visit NHJournal.com.