Arguments Against HPV Vaccination

The main point that our group made surrounded the controversy that if 13 year old girls are vaccinated against a sexually transmitted disease such as HPV, it could increase sexual activity. However, research by Bednarczyk et al., 2012 found that HPV vaccination had no increase in the markers of sexual activity (testing for pregnancy and STD’s, and counselling for contraceptives). The vaccine does not appear to be changing sexual behaviours, only protecting those when they eventually engage in them.
We also discussed the The Mental Capacity act. This states that for consent to be valid, it must be given voluntarily by an appropriately informed person who has the capacity to consent. Capacity is the ability to use and understand information to
Your understanding of the key ethical issues involved on both sides of the argument

THEIR SIDE
In terms of utilitarian ethics, if the vaccine was compulsory, herd immunity would provide protection provided for women who are unable to receive the vaccine, perhaps due to religious beliefs or fear of needles. Also, distress of the families and friends of women who develop cervical cancer caused by HPV could be prevented with vaccination.
If the vaccine was made compulsory for girls, this would prevent rejection of the vaccine for trivial reasons, such as believing the vaccine is dangerous. This links to principles regarding deontological ethics. Furthermore, this would ensure that there is no conflict between the child and parents regarding the decision.
Another point was that girls who refuse the vaccine are more likely to contract the HPV virus and therefore more likely to need cervical cancer treatment in the future. The cost of this cancer treatment is around £30,000 per person whereas a vaccine is only £130 per dose, which is an example of justice. The opposing group also stated that the money that could be saved by reducing the number of women who require cervical cancer treatment could be better placed elsewhere within the