Abstract:
In 1974, the Greenfield, Massachusetts, Board of Health ordered fluoridation of the town's water. This effort was led by pharmacist Joseph R. Charron III, and overruled Greenfield's 1968 referendum, in which the townspeople had voted against fluoridation. The board's move was strongly opposed by Dr. Peter Antonio, a Greenfield chiropractor who circulated a petition calling for a new referendum, and later ran against Charron for a seat on the board of health, in April of that year. Although Charron won the election, pro-fluoridation forces in Greenfield decided to launch a campaign before the November referendum. Part A provides background on the fluoridation issue in Massachusetts and demographic data on Greenfield. Using this information, students may be asked to map out an appropriate campaign strategy for fluoridation proponents, anticipate obstacles, and predict the outcome of the referendum. Part B describes strategies and tactics used by both sides of the issue, and gives the results of the referendum: Greenfield voters rejected fluoridation by a two-to-one margin. The case concludes with participants' reflections on the contest.
Learning Objective:
Students can use Part B to re-evaluate their own strategies in light of the outcome. The case summarizes the history of the fluoridation controversy in the US and examines the scientific, legal, economic, and political issues surrounding it.
