Upon entering the sixth grade, most girls are completely unaware of a virus that will have plagued about half of them by the time they reach adulthood. The statistics show that at least one in every two sexually active young women has had the human papillomavirus, or HPV, and by age 50, about 80 percent of women will have contracted HPV. The first broad national estimate states that one in four U.S. women aged 14 to 59 is infected with a form of HPV that can cause cervical cancer. About a quarter of a million women die from cervical cancer each year, and HPV is cervical cancer's leading cause.

In June 2006, the Food and Drug Administration approved a vaccine for HPV, and with such shocking statistics, it seems that the new vaccine should be welcomed with open arms. Scientists are constantly searching for cancer treatment and prevention, and this vaccine is the first approved vaccine proven to prevent a form of cancer.

In many states, however, the new vaccine is less than celebrated. In fact, it is often met with opposition due to introduced legislation attempting to require that young girls be vaccinated before they become sexually active. Numerous officials in states including Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Maine, Michigan and Texas are presenting bills that would mandate the HPV vaccine for girls entering the sixth grade.

Wisconsin is among the states introducing legislation, but it is taking a less strict approach. A new bill, created in January 2007, would require a parent or guardian of any girl entering the sixth grade to give the school a written statement stating the girl has received the HPV vaccine. If a parent is strongly opposed to the vaccine, he may write a note stating that he has received information about it and opted out of giving the girl the vaccine.

But why would parents prevent their daughters from receiving vaccines that would protect against cancer?

Because HPV is a sexually transmitted infection, many parents believe that by shielding their children from HPV, they will be sending a message to their kids that they condone premarital sex. According to Julaine Appling, the CEO of The Family Research Institute of Wisconsin, "This bill is an emotional response that at best jeopardizes the rights of parents to make the very best health decisions for their children."

Since when is not protecting your children from a very prevalent and frequently fatal infection considered the "best health decision" for them? Personally, I take the opposite stance and think that the proposed Wisconsin bill offers too much freedom.

Although some, like Ms. Appling, argue that there is not enough knowledge of the possible negative side effects of the vaccine, it has been tested in more than 11,000 girls aged 9 to 26 years old, and there have been no serious problems. Although opponents of the vaccine argue that we may find unhealthy side effects 20 years down the line, without the vaccine it is positive that in just one year, about 6.2 million Americans will have been infected with a genital HPV infection, and it is estimated that about 10,500 women will have developed invasive cervical cancer from HPV, resulting in approximately 3,900 fatalities.

The fact is that, despite parents' desires or beliefs, girls often do have premarital sex. If parents are allowed to opt out of giving their daughters the vaccine, they are essentially given the choice of putting their kids at a much higher risk of developing cervical cancer in their lifetimes.

And even if parents do get messages of abstinence through to their daughters, there is no guarantee that their daughters' husbands will have abstained. Men may often carry the disease without any symptoms and could pass HPV on to their wives without even knowing they have it. No matter what parents do, without the vaccine, girls are still vulnerable to HPV and cervical cancer.

Parents also worry their daughters will be more prone to having unprotected sex at earlier ages. The common belief is that girls will feel invincible to cervical cancer and genital warts, so they will feel no need to use condoms. If given proper information about the vaccine, however, kids should be no more likely to engage in unprotected sex, because the vaccine does not protect against other STIs or pregnancy.

A final concern opponents have about the vaccine is that vaccinated girls may be less likely to get pap smears to test for cervical cancer. If they believe they cannot get cervical cancer, why should they bother going to the gynecologist? Again, if educated about the vaccine, girls will learn the vaccine only protects from two strains of HPV that cause 70 percent of cervical cancer cases, and therefore, women must still get pap smears because there is still some chance of getting other forms of cervical cancer.

Essentially, this vaccine is a huge breakthrough and should be viewed optimistically. The vaccine should be administered to all girls in Wisconsin before they become sexually active, when it is most effective. If we can prevent millions of deaths each year and protect one of every two sexually active young women from a potentially serious disease, we absolutely should.

Gabbie Wade ([email protected]) is a freshman intending to major in journalism.