A bill requiring all Wisconsin sixth-grade girls to receive a cervical cancer vaccination has spurred criticism from lawmakers, medical groups and conservative organizations.
Co-author state Sen. Lena Taylor, D-Milwaukee, said her camp is working out the bill's glitches and will forecast a probable vote on it in coming months.
Taylor's spokesperson Jeff Pertl said the senator said there has not been a dip in support for the bill, which is co-sponsored by state Sen. Robert Wirch, D-Pleasant Prairie.
""I would argue momentum [for the bill] is building,"" Pertl said.
State Rep. Leah Vukmir, R-Milwaukee, chair of the Assembly's Health Committee, told the Wisconsin State Journal that if her committee sees the bill, ""it's not going anywhere.""
Pertl said the bill's authors have met with concerned groups, including the medical community, Vukmir and Focus on the Family President Julianne Appling.
While the authors insist a majority of the medical community supports the logic behind a vaccination mandate, they concede that professionals are still skeptical of the technicalities of the bill and time-line for when the vaccinations would start.
""Most of the medical groups have endorsed the vaccine and haven't taken a position on the requirement piece yet,"" Pertl said.
State Rep. Steve Wieckert, R-Appleton, a member of the Assembly Health Committee, said he is willing to accept a bill that protects women from cervical cancer, but said the Taylor-Wirch bill is not ready to be made into law.
""I've sponsored a lot of bills that have helped fight cancer in all sorts of ways, including one even on stem cells,"" Wieckert said. ""What I'm concerned about is making it mandatory at this point.""
Wieckert said he advocates educating parents about the benefits of a cervical cancer vaccination and then making it voluntary instead of a requirement. He also said he fears the cost for the shot—over $100—might be passed onto Wisconsin public schools and consequently the state's already stretched education budget.
Project Coordinator at the Family Research Institute of Wisconsin Judith Brant said her organization would rather see a bill that allows parents—not the state—A-A-to choose whether or not their daughter receives the shot.
The current bill would allow parents against the vaccination to use an ""opt-out provision"" for their daughters.
We would much prefer an ""opt-in provision,"" Brant said.
Wieckert remains optimistic that the bill could face the scrutiny of his committee.
""Maybe when the two circles meet there's room for agreement, and the bill would move forward,"" Wieckert said.
