It is common for people to spend more time deliberating over what type of cable TV package they will purchase than over who will provide their family with primary health care services. Making the right choice of health care provider may be one of the most important decisions that you make for your family. It may determine whether your family stays together or is broken up and destroyed by Child Protective Services. Are you a parent who believes that you have the right to make decisions for your children regarding the medical care they receive? Are you a parent who believes that you have a responsibility to control what your children eat? Are you a parent who believes that you should be able to determine how your children should be educated and what they are taught? If you are such a parent, then beware, your freedom to raise your children and make decisions for them may be threatened by Child Protective Services in the state where you live. The security of your home and family could be destroyed by those who do not support your rights as a parent to raise your children according to the values that you cherish. This article will help you protect your family from unwanted intrusion by those who think they know more about parenting your children than you do. To protect your family, it is necessary that you make wise decisions about the healthcare providers that you choose. The wrong choice of a physician can lead to dreadful consequences for every member of your family, because there is a legal connection between your physician and Child Protective Services.
Should laws be put into place to remove religious and philosophical exemptions to vaccines, and only allow "medical exemptions" to vaccines? If you or your child are sick at the time of vaccination with a fever or on antibiotics, there is no medical vaccine exemption for you. If you are a pregnant health care worker and do not want to get a flu shot while you are pregnant because you do not want to risk a miscarriage, no medical vaccine exemption for you. If your child was injured or died after vaccination and you want to protect your other children from vaccine injury, no medical vaccine exemption for your children. If your baby was born prematurely and is low weight and struggling to survive, no medical vaccine exemption for your infant. For all practical purposes, the Centers for Disease Control and medical trade organizations now direct pediatricians and other vaccinators to deny the medical vaccine exemption to 99.99 percent of Americans. If you want the legal right to freely exercise conscience and protect your bodily integrity or that of your child when it comes to vaccine risk-taking, if you do not want to wake up one day and be forced to play vaccine roulette when you have good reason to conclude that you or your child are at high risk for suffering vaccine harm, you need to act now. You can be sure that the odds definitely will not be in your favor when it comes to finding a doctor to grant you a medical vaccine exemption.
Two bills threaten our freedom to make health care decisions. In California, Senate Bill 277 mandates that all children be fully vaccinated in order to attend public school, private school or day care. Unprecedented opposition has risen up against it as parents statewide stand up for their rights. Now, a federal bill has just been submitted to match it: H.R. 2232 will require states to have mandatory vaccine laws for public school attendance in order to receive federal grant money for preventive health services. It’s essentially a financial threat by the federal government for all states to get their citizens in line. As an Orange County pediatrician, I give vaccines in my office every day. I’ll be one of the first to acknowledge how important they are. But when we take a closer look at what these drastic changes really mean, wiser minds will realize they are bad choices for our state and our nation.
One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all "quacks." However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding "the science" of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines. The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary. Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field. In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves "pro-vaccine," for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual. Many doctors recommend a "delayed" vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot. These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions. In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.
Florida Congresswoman Frederica S. Wilson (D-24) has introduced a bill, House Resolution H.R. 2232, that will require all states to mandate all students enrolled in public schools receive all the vaccines recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Policy, a federal body compromised of vaccine-industry representatives, which includes vaccines for HPV, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, Paul Offit’s rota virus vaccine, annual flu shots, and dozens of others. States that do not comply will not be eligible for grants for “preventive health services” under the Public Health Services Act.
With so many physicians-turned-legislators siding with Big Pharma to strip away the rights of U.S. Citizens to informed consent of medical practices such as vaccines, it is a breath of fresh air to listen to one State Senator who is also a practicing physician oppose medical tyranny. Texas Senator Donna Campbell, M.D. spoke out against forced vaccinations on the Senate Committee on Education. Senator Campbell is certified in both emergency room medicine and ophthalmology.
Senator Jeff Tarte of North Carolina has co-authored a bill to remove the religious exemptions to vaccines, and recently addressed the public to explain his reasoning for drafting this bill. He states that only two religious groups in the world oppose vaccines: Christian Scientists and the Taliban. Since when did the Taliban become a "religious group"? What exactly was Mr. Tarte trying to imply by comparing those who used religious beliefs to exempt themselves from receiving vaccines in North Carolina to the Taliban?
California State Senator Dr. Richard Pan is a co-sponsor of a new proposed California bill, SB 277, which seeks to remove the personal belief exemption to vaccinations in California. Who is Dr. Pan? He is an "industry insider" when it comes to the medical industry. He is a teaching faculty member at UC Davis Children's Hospital, and has served in many organizations that set medical policy and funding, such as the American Medical Association, the United Way, Sacramento First 5 Commission, Healthy Kids Healthy Future, Sacramento Health Improvement Project, and others. Dr. Pan was also a supporter of AB 499 which allows minor children as young as 12 years old to be vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine without the knowledge or consent of their parents.
Constitutional attorney Jonathan Emord has written an excellent commentary about current legislative efforts to remove vaccine exemptions, and increase forced vaccinations against people's wills. Emord writes: "The current rush to revoke laws allowing conscientious dissent from compulsory vaccination, including encumbering or revoking grounds based on religious or medical grounds, are a return to a very ugly era of elitism, one of gross intrusion into rights of personal autonomy and liberty that left us only a few decades ago." Emord reminds us that it was not that long ago when "eugenics" was a popular "scientific fact" accepted by the majority in our society, and used to pass state laws forcing sterilization of people considered "genetically unfit" for society. The most famous case was Buck vs. Bell, a Virginia statute which was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1927. The Court's decision, delivered by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., included the infamous phrase "Three generations of imbeciles are enough." Upholding Virginia's sterilization statute provided the green light for similar laws in 30 states, under which an estimated 65,000 Americans were sterilized without their own consent or that of a family member. In 2001, the Virginia General Assembly acknowledged that the sterilization law was based on faulty science and expressed its "profound regret over the Commonwealth's role in the eugenics movement in this country and over the damage done in the name of eugenics." What other "faulty science" is there in mainstream western science today that seeks to impose its will on a free society by force in the area of vaccinations, where proponents claim "the science is settled?"
More than 1.2 million people in the United States are infected with HIV but government officials do not ban HIV infected children and adults from attending school, receiving medical care, being employed, or otherwise participating in society. In fact, there are anti-discrimination laws that guarantee civil rights protections for Americans infected with HIV or living with AIDS. In 2012, public health officials reported that about two million people in America are infected with chlamydia, tuberculosis, syphilis and gonorrhea, and they estimate another three million people are infected with hepatitis C. Like those with HIV or AIDS, these citizens are not targeted for discrimination and blocked from getting a public education, being employed or moving freely in society. But in 2015 after a handful of measles cases were identified at Disneyland, suddenly Americans are being asked to surrender civil liberties. Healthy children whose only "crime" is that their parents have chosen to refuse toxic vaccines are suddenly at risk for being denied an education in America and other freedoms granted to other citizens. How did a handful of measles cases at Disneyland turn into a full-scale assault on civil and human rights in America?