Sesame Street is produced, in part, by our tax dollars, and aired through public television. Parents are the arbiters of their children's best interest, and this includes medical decisions. It is not the role of the government to fund money to produce propaganda in the name of "educational television" to cause children in elementary school to believe that they should be vaccinated, and (implicitly) that their parents are "wrong" in not having them vaccinated. That is not the role of government. I know that the Soviet government and Nazi Germany lionized children who snitched on their parents for thoughtcrime, but this is still America, and our tax monies should not be used to undermine the status of parents as the arbiters of their children's best medical interest.
Any parent who refuses to get a child eligible for inoculation inoculation is putting a child at danger. Most states have laws mandating car seats for small children. Protective services will snoop around if a nosy neighbor reports that your child is malnourished or gets injured or traumatized in abuse. No parent can provide a child for prostitution. Failing to get an eligible child inoculated is
prima facie child abuse or neglect.
Government has a rightful role in child welfare. At this point I want a child inoculated for COVID-19. If I had a child or grandchild over the age of 5, then that child or grandchild would be inoculated already. There has been little time for the 5-11 category... but one can never be too militant in protecting children from a real, preventable danger. We put down beloved dogs who bite children. COVID-19 is much more dangerous than an ill-behaving dog.
I am sure that the producers of Sesame Street thought this one over adequately. "Big Bird" getting an inoculation? If that is what it takes to fulfill social responsibility, then fine. I saw the living former Presidents getting inoculated.
This isn't an advocacy for parents being the final arbiters in things such as genital mutilation or not providing medical treatment for inoperable cancer, but the COVID-19 vaccine being administered to a 5-11 year old is not that kind of decision. Nor is a 5-11 year old child capable of making that sort of decision. These sort of things are propaganda aimed at children. That's not OK on the taxpayer's dime. The idea that vaccinating 5-11 year old children against COVID-19 is the best course of action for such children is far from settled science at this point.
Whether it is right to keep children away from rattlesnakes, to keep poisons and matches out of their reach, to not allow them to smoke or to drink alcohol, or to spare them from contact with pornography is settled. COVID-19 kills and does lasting harm. Getting inoculated is not a partisan or sectarian issue. It is not a statement of economic values.
It is not up to a child between the ages of 5 and 11 to decide to get the inoculation. It is up to parents and guardians. To not get a child inoculated against measles is unconscionable. Most of us are in no position in which to dispute settled decisions of the medical community.
Propaganda?
Technically this is propaganda.
