Parents, not bureaucrats, should call the shots

President Trump signed an executive order last week reducing the number of recommended childhood vaccines from 18 to 11 and urging states with school-entry requirements to update their laws accordingly.

That should be a starting point, not an end point.

More coercion will deepen skepticism, not cure it.

Alabama is already closer to that model than most states. Its school-entry requirements rely on a narrower set of core vaccines and do not force hepatitis B vaccination for every student. Other states should treat the president’s order as the floor for vaccine freedom, not the ceiling.

The most immediate step is obvious: States can reduce school-entry requirements to match the new federal recommendations. Better still, they should eliminate those mandates altogether or, at minimum, make it much easier for families to opt out.

Coercion has no place in parental medical decisions. Public schools exist to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic. They should not condition access to a publicly funded classroom on a government-approved medical regimen.

Aligning state rules with the new federal baseline would be progress. But true parental authority requires going farther.

Forty-six states already allow religious exemptions from school vaccine requirements. Their broad existence also shows that states can preserve opt-outs without schools simply ceasing to function.

Religious exemptions should remain. But the principle should not end there.

Parents can have sincere nonreligious reasons for declining particular vaccines, whether because of personal medical history, concerns about a specific product, or objections to the schedule itself. Treating religious objections as legitimate while dismissing every other conscientious objection draws an arbitrary line.

States should therefore expand personal and philosophical exemptions as well. Families should not have to choose between access to public education and surrendering authority over their children’s medical decisions.

Idaho has already gone farther. Its Medical Freedom Act prohibits schools from imposing medical intervention mandates, including vaccine requirements, as a condition of attendance. Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo is pushing in the same direction, seeking to eliminate school vaccine mandates entirely in the Sunshine State.

Other lawmakers should study those models. The core principle is straightforward: Attending a government school should not require surrendering parental authority over a child’s body.

The burden of vaccine mandates also falls unevenly.

Affluent parents who object can more easily homeschool or move a child to a private school with different policies. Working families often have fewer options. They may be forced to comply, navigate exemption processes that demand time and paperwork they do not have, or keep a child out of the classroom.

RELATED: Fauci is yesterday’s fight. Medical freedom is today’s.

Adam Glanzman/Bloomberg/Getty Images

That creates a two-tier system in which families with the fewest resources have the least room to exercise meaningful choice.

Reducing mandates or broadening opt-outs would expand educational freedom precisely for the families who are most constrained by the current system.

None of this prevents families from vaccinating their children. Parents who want the full schedule remain free to choose it. The question is whether the state should force that choice on everyone else as the price of attending school.

Public trust in health institutions fell sharply after COVID. Rebuilding that trust will require transparent information, honest risk communication, and genuine freedom to say no. More coercion will deepen skepticism, not cure it.

President Trump’s executive order gives states a practical starting point.

Legislatures should use it: Reduce school-entry vaccine mandates to the new federal baseline, expand opt-outs beyond religious grounds, or eliminate the mandates entirely.

Parents, not bureaucrats, should decide what goes into their children’s bodies. States that move first can expand educational freedom while beginning the harder work of rebuilding public confidence through voluntary cooperation rather than compulsion.