I’ve reported on Idaho’s anti-vaccination movement for the past 10 years, most recently for ProPublica. I’ve written about people moving to Idaho as self-described “refugees” from states where vaccines are required for school. After the COVID-19 pandemic arrived, I wrote about Idaho’s low COVID-19 vaccination rate and, later, how that contributed to deaths and the near-collapse of our hospitals.
As a journalist, the debate over vaccine policy and the rationales of the people behind the anti-vaccination movement fascinate me, even as the work comes with the weight of reporting on what can be, in some cases, life-or-death stakes. But I’m not just a journalist. I’m an Idahoan with a family, including a young child in school.
This week, I held both of those identities as I published a story about Idaho becoming the first state in the nation to ban vaccine mandates. The Idaho Medical Freedom Act makes it illegal to require almost anyone to take a vaccine, test or other “medical intervention.” The law’s author, Leslie Manookian, is a finance executive turned practitioner of homeopathy who became a leader in the “health freedom” movement.
Watch Leslie Manookian and Allies Celebrate Idaho Medical Freedom Act
I first heard Manookian’s name in the mid-2010s, when she was part of a group seeking to change Idaho’s school vaccination laws and rules, among other things. She went on to create the Health Freedom Defense Fund, which brought several lawsuits over vaccine and mask mandates during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. She lives in one of the few Idaho communities that wholeheartedly embraced COVID-19 precautions, and she has described feeling ostracized.
In our interview and follow-up calls, Manookian told me about her stance on vaccines, what she believes the role of public health should be and her longtime desire to pass the Idaho Medical Freedom Act.
In the background of our conversation: a national measles outbreak that is larger than the U.S. has seen in decades.
One big change with the Idaho Medical Freedom Act is how schools and day cares can respond if, or when, measles arrives. The law makes it illegal to send home kids who aren’t vaccinated, as long as they are “healthy.” That has important implications when it comes to measles, which can spread for days before the contagious person even realizes they’re sick.
As a person who lives here, I can’t help but think about this. My family is vaccinated, but what if a student at my child’s school can’t be immunized for some reason; what will their parents do if measles begins to spread? What about my friends with kids too young to be immunized, who still need to go to day care? Does the new law keep them from choosing what they believe is best for their child?
I posed that question to an ally of Manookian’s, Mary Holland, the CEO of Children’s Health Defense, a national organization that’s become one of the fiercest foes of childhood vaccines.
Holland said Idaho parents who want their kids to be in a learning environment with “herd immunity” levels of measles vaccination can start a private “association” — not a school, because schools can’t require vaccines — just as parents who don’t like vaccines have done in order to dodge requirements in states like California and New York.
Her answer underscored how this law isn’t just about policy. It is about flipping the script on what we’ve considered the norm for generations now: that if you’re going to be part of a community, you must help protect the other people in your community. The thinking behind the Idaho Medical Freedom Act not only rejects that norm when it comes to vaccines, it makes it illegal.
A week after my interview with Manookian, the duality of being a reporter covering vaccine policies and a parent of a school-aged child again came into sharp focus. I was standing outside my child’s school, chatting with the school nurse. She is in charge of many things, but in particular, knowing our school’s vaccination rates, fending off outbreaks and deciding if kids are too sick to be at school. As we talked, my phone buzzed with a call from Manookian to continue our conversation about the upcoming story.
It’s always my goal as a journalist to ensure accurate and fair coverage. I wanted to include Manookian’s voice because of how much influence she has over public health rules in Idaho. So I worked to faithfully describe her beliefs and how she arrived at them, but I also had a duty to spell out the wide array of scientific evidence to the contrary.
In our discussions, Manookian told me her driving goal is to keep people from being coerced into something they don’t believe is right, no matter what. It’s also her belief that vaccines are dangerous and that infectious diseases are beneficial. (That risk-benefit calculus is not supported by the overwhelming body of evidence, not even by studies the movement relies on.)
As an Idahoan, I pay close attention to what’s happening around me, so that I can make informed decisions. As a journalist, it’s my job to help readers understand the thinking behind changes to public policy and where those ideas come from.
As I reported this week, Manookian doesn’t just have her eyes on Idaho. She intends to take this law to other states and believes it can be a model for the country. I’ll have my eyes on that, too.
You can read my full story, which includes my interview with Manookian, for yourself here.
