“So you’re the little woman who wrote the book that made this great war!”
Abraham Lincoln to Harriet Beecher Stowe, author of Uncle Tom's Cabin, 1862
Sometimes fiction is truer than mere reality. Maybe we can learn from it.
The interaction between Lincoln and Stowe probably didn't happen, even if the story persists and there is a statue in Hartford, Connecticut, of the supposed encounter.
The book, Uncle Tom's Cabin, was fiction. It depicted the harsh, cruel impact of slavery on the lives of well-drawn characters, including "Uncle Tom," a Christian preacher and slave who is flogged to death by his cruel master, Simon Legree. It fueled abolitionist sentiment in the North.
I read Uncle Tom's Cabin in high school for pleasure, and then again in a graduate school class on how history is shaped by fictionalized history.
Some of the power of The Atlantic article comes from the fact that it isn't evident that it is fiction, at least at first. I read it thinking it was straight-up journalism, a confession by a mother who had not vaccinated her children for measles. It depicts the feeling of anguish and remorse she felt as she watched her two children get desperately sick from measles. Both of her children were in pain. Both were hospitalized and near death. One child had permanent disabling brain damage, she wrote.
 |
| Click: Gifted article |
She wrote:
You plant her on the couch with a blanket and put Bluey on the TV while she drifts in and out of sleep. You coax her to eat by offering ice cream, which she says feels good on her throat. She’s a tough kid, but you can tell she’s miserable—there are circles under her eyes as she complains of a headache, then grimaces when she coughs.
Then later:
You suffer an icy moment of realization: This is a medical crisis. What you will learn later is that the tiny air sacs inside her lungs have become breeding grounds for the virus, and the inflammation generated by her immune response is inhibiting oxygen from reaching her bloodstream.
And later, in a call to the physician before the rush to the emergency room:
The receptionist responds gently, types swiftly, and then pauses. Are your children vaccinated? she asks. Her tone is flat and inscrutable, but you detect an undercurrent of judgment. You wince and tell her the truth. No, you say, no vaccines.
The Atlantic story is part of the changing reality of the return of measles. Outbreaks are in the news.
Maybe the zeitgeist is changing. Vaccines are getting a burst of positive publicity. Medford writer, Bruce Van Zee, a retired physician, alerted me this week to news that vaccinations may have benefits beyond protection against the primary disease. From his February 13 post titled "Surprising Vaccine Benefits, he wrote:
Data extending back 25 years suggests Flu vaccine is associated with lower risks of cardiovascular disease, including heart failure, stroke and heart attack.
Dementia risk appears to be less in individuals who take a variety of vaccines including Shingles , Influenza, Tetanus/Whooping cough, and pneumonia vaccines.
A Danish study found a 10% decrease in cardiovascular hospitalizations for those who took the Respiratory Syncytial Virus vaccine, which is one of the newer vaccines recommended by authorities.
Covid vaccines have been shown to decrease the incidence of Long Covid, a debilitating illness with physical and mental symptoms.
Zeitgeists change. Misery is the greatest teacher; people value potential reward less than they dislike pain and loss. Probably more children need to suffer and die. One in 10 people who get measles require hospitalization. Parents may need to share the experience of quarantines. Someone will write a true story of loss that matches The Atlantic article.
Possibly the plaintiffs bar will get involved. Physicians are damned if they do and damned if they don't. My experience as a financial advisor informs my thinking here. If a client made a very poor decision that cost him money, the fact that it was documented as the client's decision does not protect the financial advisor. If the decision was a poor one, how come the advisor didn't talk the client out of it?
I can envision that the parent of a child who dies or who faces permanent, expensive disability would sue the physician who consented to the parent's vaccine refusal. The parent's written consent won't be enough to protect the physician. After all, who is the expert here? Informed consent means informed consent, and the physician could have been more persuasive and informative in talking the parent out of refusing vaccinations. Some physician or hospital probably needs to suffer and pay. If a child victim of measles-induced encephalitis faces lifetime care of $20,000 a month, someone will be looking for a deep pocket. Lawyers may do for public health what the CDC no longer will.
I grew up in a moment of tremendous relief that vaccines were saving Americans from infectious diseases. Whew!!! The victory was too great, too complete. Many people forgot what was gained. Too many people decided vaccines are the risk. Let the herd protect you. Or get the disease. What could go wrong?
The zeitgeist will change when people engage with the alternatives to vaccination and people suffer and die. The Atlantic article is one step in that change. But on reflection, my real bet is on the plaintiff bar. No one really consents to their child being on a lifetime of bedridden life support, not in hindsight.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog by email go to Https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
