“Serv and Return” is an occasional series that spotlights a recent exchange on the Alliance listserv—a widely used channel for the network to provide rapid-response resources and support to one another.
In March, Brittany Boulton of Groundwork Ohio reached out to the Alliance listserv, and allies quickly responded.
“The Ohio legislature is currently considering Ohio House Bill 561, which would require schools, preschool programs, and child care providers to provide notice to parents and caregivers about Ohio’s vaccine exemption.
The bill would also create opportunities for ‘individuals’ to formally file a complaint with the state if they think a school/ECE site is not complying with this new notification requirement, with potential risk of suspended licensure if the state deemed the school/ECE site was not providing proper notice of state vaccine exemptions. The bill would repeal existing law authorizing schools/ECE sites to deny admission to non-immunized children during outbreaks of epidemics.
Pro-business conservatives are asking does this create an extra administrative burden on providers. Our team has met with Ohio’s American Academy of Pediatrics chapter and we are coordinating a response testimony related to early childhood health.
I am writing today to invite advice on strategies and sources that other advocates may have used when faced with similar challenges.”
Advocates from across the country shared strategies, resources, and emerging approaches:
Heather Braum of Kansas Action for Children drew on her extensive experience in Kansas to share a broad coalition-building framework for navigating anti-vaccine and public health legislation. She recommended engaging school nurses’ organizations, state superintendents’ groups, early childhood coalitions, state public health associations, state chambers of commerce, teachers’ groups, medically fragile kids groups, and immunization coalitions that bring together health departments, physicians, pharmacists, hospitals, and disease advocacy groups. She noted that the provision stripping schools and child care sites of their ability to exclude unvaccinated children during disease outbreaks is especially problematic—particularly for family child care homes. She pointed to the Columbus, Ohio, measles outbreak in late 2023 as a potential source of allies who have firsthand experience with how existing policies helped contain that outbreak. She also offered a strategic counter-move worth considering: if the bill requires providers to share more information about exemptions, advocates could seek to amend it to also require education for parents seeking non-medical exemptions—noting that a handful of states have explored similar provisions.
Through the Alliance network the Boulton was connected to Josh Gryniewicz at Odd Duck, an Alliance Responsive Support Provider who brought a narrative strategy perspective, noting that bills like HB 561 often function less as straightforward policy proposals and more as vehicles for reshaping public trust. Key recommendations included:
- Reframe the narrative proactively. Rather than positioning advocacy solely as opposition, lead with values-forward messages — schools and child care providers as trusted partners in keeping kids safe; vaccination policies as what keeps classrooms open and communities stable; protecting medically fragile children as a shared, non-partisan responsibility.
- Don’t cede the “information” ground. If the bill is about requiring more communication, there is an opportunity to shape what good information looks like. “Prebunking“— providing clear, contextualized explanations before people encounter misleading claims—can be more effective than reactive debunking.
- Anticipate amplification dynamics. With a prominent anti-vaccine advocate building a social media following, content from hearings can be quickly clipped and reframed. Advocates should prepare short plain-language responses, identify credible non-government messengers, and align partners on consistent framing across channels.
- Center messengers, not just messages. Parents of medically fragile children, early childhood providers, and business voices can sometimes cut through in ways that institutional voices alone cannot. In North Dakota, engaging ranchers, faith leaders, and local community influencers — rather than leading with government or public health voices — was critical in defeating nine anti-vaccine bills.
Gryniewicz also pointed to a STAT News piece on North Dakota’s approach as a useful model: advocates there succeeded not by leading with facts or opposition alone, but by investing in listening, building unlikely coalitions, and intentionally lowering the temperature of the conversation.