Stakeholder #1

     This blog entry will be all about one of the primary stakeholders- the parents that are anti-vaccine, anti SB 277, and pro personal belief exemption.  It's going to be a long one, so grab a snack and get ready to learn everything you ever wanted about the parents that are against vaccinating their children.

1.  Describing the parents:

Winters, Robert. "Former Research Scientist Tina Kimmel, PhD
from the CDPH speaks out against SB277".   06/12/15 via YouTube.
Creative Commons Attribution License. 

      The parents that are against the SB 277 bill are viewed by the rest of the parents (those who want their children to be protected against viruses and diseases) as crazy.  However, in reality, the majority of the parents that oppose vaccinations are intelligent and educated.  The only reason that they don't want their children to be vaccinated is because they are afraid that they will develop autism.  The parents see more children with autism than they do with a disease like polio.  However, doctors and medical professionals who full-heartedly support the vaccinations have tested again and again that those ideas are not reality.  There have been seven large tests on the so-claimed "autism causing" MMR vaccinations do not in fact lead to autism.  Jenny McCarthy, a well known actress, is one of these parents that blame the vaccines on leading to autism and other health issues.  

     The parents that are against SB 277 are found on both websites and social media, as well as protests and rallies in public places like the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, CA.  There is the website that I mentioned in an earlier post that is specifically for the parents that are opposed to the vaccinations.  There is also a very active Facebook page that informs everyone who follows it, any new updates in medicine the mandates for vaccinations.  The articles that are posted on both the website and the Facebook page show that the parents are not just worried about the autism issue, but also the fact that everyone will have to be vaccinated and the personal freedoms will be lost with the passing of this law.  

      2. Three Claims from parents:

•     " In spite of the government declaring that vaccines are safe for all, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program- a government program- has paid out more than $3.18 billion to families whose children have been harmed by vaccines" (Kroner 1).  
• "It is not so much about the vaccinations as it is about the defense of liberty.  The government, as a creature of the people, doesn't have the right to tell people what they can and can't put into their bodies." (Duran 1) 
• "Vaccinated children are found to be more chronically ill than unvaccinated children with rates for autism, ear infections, ADHD, asthma and allergies as much as 30% higher than unvaxed children." (Sarah, the healthy home economist 1) 

      3.  Claims Explained:

• Shannon Kroner, a mother and educational therapist in the San Fernando Valley in California, helped Tim Donnelly to coordinate the SB 277 referendum.  She claims that vaccines are not safe for children, and that nobody can guarantee the safety of them.  That is why she said the first quote above.  Kroner is good for stating the facts- with the money that the government spent to pay back the families that were hurt from vaccinations.  She really does a good job playing with the emotions of the reader since she is blunt but makes the government look bad too.  Although this is not necessarily an objective quote, it is good to include for the "fight" for the opposing side for the parents.  Kroner seems to be a 
• Katherine Duran, an Elk Grove county stay-at home parent, is against the SB 277 and she knows that the referendum was having a hard time getting enough signatures or enough funding.  The claim is valid since she has a view that most of the other parents seem to have had towards the SB 277 new law.  They seem to have the view that the government should not be in charge of determining what does and does not go into your body.  Objectively, this quote does prove a valid point that the parents against the vaccination bill are more upset that the government is taking over their personal rights, not just about the vaccinations needed to go to school.  Duran puts emotion behind this quote with her word choice.  Not only does she refer to the government as a creature, but she also uses strong words about individual rights.  
• Sarah, the healthy home economist, the author of the blog post about 6 reasons why parents should say no to vaccinating their children.  Considering that the author has no last name, no credentials, and nothing that shows where she got her information from, I would definitely not consider her to be a credible resource.  What Sarah did here was make an assumption.  There is no proof behind her statement.  The only thing that is known from her incredibly false statement is that she has a lot of emotion towards something that she obviously does not know enough about the topic to say correct things.  She specifically says that she "guesses" on what is going on in the health world.  That tells me that she is not qualified to be giving others advice on how to keep their children healthy. 

     4. Differences in Claims

     These claims are very different than those of the other stakeholders' claims.  The claims made from these parents are more based on opinion and less based on factual evidence.  The claims that are made from the other stakeholders are more factually based.  However, some of the stakeholders in this parent section apply to educated doctors and nurses who are still against the SB 277 which is what is similar to the claims of the other stakeholders.  This section of parents who are against the bill will have the same sort of claims as the parents on the other side who may or may not be educated, but they say things based on assumptions and ideas that have been put in their heads.  However, these claims will be the most different from the politicians that helped create the bill in the first place.  The politicians have people who do research to make sure that the bills are correctly put into law.