Skip to comments.Colorado to Consider Controversial Vaccination Law: Is Not Wanting to Vaccinate a Parental Right?
Posted on 03/24/2014 7:17:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Colorado’s House Health Insurance and Environment Committee has passed a bill that would make it more difficult for parents to opt out of the state’s child vaccination requirement. The bill would mandate a state-sponsored education program for parents who don’t want their child vaccinated and would force those parents to “acquire the signature of a health care professional confirming disclosure of possible health risks ‘to the student and the community.’
Similar measures have passed in three other states, while many other states are considering the question of mandatory vaccinations for school attendance.
The debate in Colorado was passionate.
State Rep. Dan Pabon (D) proposed the bill to ensure that parents are more informed and “that they’re not just opting out simply because of convenience,” according to the Denver Post.
“Vaccine refusal results in higher rates of vaccine-preventable disease,” Pabon said. “This is a public health issue. These are very serious diseases.”
Colorado has the sixth-highest rate of non-vaccinated public school kindergarteners. The bill will also mandate all licensed schools and day care centers to release public records on the percentages of their non-vaccinated children.
“There are kids who can’t get vaccinated because they’re immuno-compromised and are being exposed to vaccine-preventable diseases, Pabon argued on Thursday. To add on top of that, older populations that have medical conditions are also at risk.”
Although the bill would not eliminate the personal belief exemption, parents opposing the legislation argued that increased education mandates could lead to the erosion of parental rights during Thursdays testimony before lawmakers.
“Parents have a constitutional right to parent their children,” Susan Lawson, whose daughter developed encephalitis after a routine vaccine when she was a year old, told CBS Denver. “I am not an uneducated woman.”
Anti-vaccination advocacy group National Vaccine Information Center has also attacked the proposal as one that singles out and discriminates against a minority of parents with sincerely held personal beliefs by assuming they are uneducated and should be forced into a state approved education program.
When my mother heard of the breakthrough by Jonas Salk in developing a vaccination against polio, she fell to her knees and thanked God for his mercy. We, today, have absolutely no conception of the rank fear that gathered in the breasts of parents prior to the polio vaccine. Every cold in our family would put her on edge. And all of us grew up in an age before vaccines for measles, mumps, and whooping cough. These diseases were — and are — childhood killers. I’m sure the controversy today over vaccines would perplex her to no end.
The odds of a child dying from measles are 50 times greater than the child experiencing any life-threatening side effects from that vaccine. Prior to 1963 before the vaccine was introduced, there were 4 million cases of measles per year in the U.S. with an average of 450 deaths. On the other hand, there are severe reactions to the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella) in only 1 of about 2 million doses. What rational parent makes a choice not to vaccinate their children?
The supposed link between autism and vaccinations has been debunked over and over, and yet the belief still persists. The Centers for Disease Control examined the question of autism and the safety of vaccines in general:
Evidence from several studies examining trends in vaccine use and changes in autism frequency does not support such an association between thimerosal and autism. Furthermore, a scientific reviewExternal Web Site Icon by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) concluded that “the evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosalcontaining vaccines and autism.” CDC supports the IOM conclusion that there is no relationship between vaccines containing thimerosal and autism rates in children.
The IOM also recently conducted a thorough review of the current medical and scientific evidence on vaccines and certain health events that may be observed after vaccination. It released a report in August 2011 on 8 vaccines given to children and adults that found the vaccines to be generally safe and serious adverse events following these vaccinations to be rare.
We are paying a price for our scientific ignorance. Parents who don’t have their children immunized do so largely because they think the diseases are wiped out or there is little chance their children will be infected. But because of falling rates of vaccinations among children, these diseases are making a roaring comeback:
Measles, mumps, whooping cough all deadly diseases. Until recently, they were virtually eliminated thanks to vaccines that prevent kids from getting sick.
But now doctors see an alarming trend more and more people are coming down with these diseases.
Kids die from measles on a regular basis. Kids are in hospitals and can die from whooping cough very commonly. So these kids are at risk, said Dr. Scott Krugman, Chairman, Department of Pediatrics, MedStar Franklin Square Medical Center.
Here in Maryland, cases of whooping cough are skyrocketing tripling from 123 cases in 2011 to nearly 370 last year. Outbreaks of measles and mumps have swept through states across the country.
The explanations made by parents for not vaccinating their kids are pathetic, as you’ll see on the next page.
So, if these diseases can be prevented by a vaccine, why is a growing number of parents not getting their children the shots? Some fear the vaccines can do more harm than good.
These vaccines and all of these doses also can be deadly, an Annapolis mom said.
After researching vaccines and talking with doctors, an Annapolis mom decided not to vaccinate her young children. She asked WJZ to hide her identity because other parents are angry her kids could put their kids in danger.
Bui: What happened that led you to make this decision not to vaccinate your kids?
Annapolis mom: It just didnt make sense to me. I didnt understand why a little human had to get so many drugs at one time.
She believes her familys healthy lifestyle will keep her children from getting sick. But most doctors insist thats not enough.
Maybe she should consider hiring a shaman to ward off the evil spirits. Works just as well as eating arugula.
I suppose you could make the argument that the CDC is in the pockets of Big Pharma and are doing their bidding by cooking the books on vaccines. I’ve seen it all over the internet and in emails so I know that someone is reading that crap. And, if you wished, you could ignore the studies done by respected scientific organizations (or similarly lump them in with the CDC as doing Big Pharma’s bidding) that say there is no causal link between vaccines and autism, and substitute pseudo-scientific pronouncements from people selling a book or product, telling you not to vaccinate your kids.
You can choose to believe anything you want. But when your beliefs place others in danger, that is a moral and civic wrong. Yes, you are free to parent your children any way you please. But you are not free to endanger the lives of others. Not getting your children vaccinated is an unconscionable omission and sending parents to school in order to try to knock some sense into their heads is the least the state can do to protect children from their stupidity.
My family does.
I remember, in the second grade, my class and other classes in my school were sent home because a child had been diagnosed with polio. Two weeks later, when we returned, we found out that two of our classmates would not be coming back as they were never going to walk again. Polio left them paralyzed.
It scared the geebees out of me. I was so thankful the following year when they announced a polio vaccine and we lined up to receive our polio shots. As a 7 or 8 year old kid, I think that was the only time I wanted a shot.
If it is not then we open the door to the state being able to tell us what kind of medical treatments we must give our children.
Soon we end up with things like what happened to Justina Pelletie happening with no place to appeal.
Once you say a parent must do what the state wants in an area it is not long before you have no rights at all in that area.
People are so hateful about this issue so it doesn’t get anywhere.
It’s black and white, no questions asked, when, in fact, it is grey.
Parents have a responsibility to not expose kids their own children go to school with. That is where the fight starts.
If we were to approach it from the point of view that people, parents, could have domain over their own health and that of their children, it could be discussed rationally. But people have given responsibility of their health over to the medical community, and, now, the government.
If it were discussed, people could make decisions and choices.
A school has the right to expect basic protection for their kids and should have the option of requiring vaccination
Day care center planning sets the schedule to some degree.
Parents do have the right to choose vaccination, societal pressure takes that away. I few were to look at the schedule of vaccination form an intelligent point of view, it could be managed. Look at research. look at how other countries manage it, particularly countries whose citizens use their freedom to collaborate with medicine industry to make choices. for ex., when I, a health care professional, ask the pediatrician why my newborn needs a hepB shot one hour after birth, I get humiliation, berating, refusal, abuse and condescension, in front of my spouse. But the question is not answered. That’s where Obamacare is apparent. Not Obamacare itself, but its roots.
In researching when Japanese or German kids get their shots, weighed against incidence of disease outbreaks/management there is no reason a kid who’s staying home with mom for five years needs to have five painful shots one hour after birth, taxing his immune system.
Then there’s the conversation that needs to be had regarding additives. WE know the pharmaceutical industry is a huge liar. We know they are not about healing but about thriving on illness. We know they and the FDA work together and without us. We know the medical industry cares nothing for parents’ concerns, and they treat people who ask questions with more suspicion and ridicule than the IRS does a conservative. And we know the pharmaceutical industry has some bad mistakes on their record.
We know there is a high rate of autism. Baby boomers like me knew kids, we grew up in a kids world, cat in the hat no parents, six kids to a family. Now with two kids to a family we know, I know kids with autism, boys, at a rate now of 600% more than what we knew growing up.
Everyone can yell and deny, but that doesn’t fix the problem NOR cause us to pretend it’s not true.
If we could look at all of this, we could get to what is causing that, and we could look at the unnecessary incidence of ultrasound on fetuses. Unless there is reason to believe there could and should be prenatal surgery done on the fetus, an ultrasound is unnecessary. No one looks at this. But bombarding these kids with ultrasound waves can not be good for them, just at least.
Most people who choose not to vaccinate aren’t fearing the chemical itself : All medicines are complex and mysterious and we simply don’t understand them.
And when compared to the Polio vaccine or the vaccines of yesteryear - Modern vaccinations have more influence from the government than from our doctors. And therein is the problem. We see new data that links serious issues to the vaccine - And the government telling us to take them. When the government tells you to do something, It’s NEVER in your best interest.
Lastly, These forms also have lines that say things like “I understand that opting out of a vaccination program puts my child’s life and health at risk” and then it requires signature. What you’re doing is signing your kids away. You’re signing a piece of paper that will allow the state to come and take the kids. That’s intolerable.
I choose not to vaccinate now. I have vaccinations from when I was a kid but those vaccines are different than what we are facing these days. It’s a totally different ballgame.
I’m 71 and remember how happy my parents and I were when development of the Salk vaccine was announced. Going to the doctor at age 7 to get the shot was pure pleasure. No joke and no crying.
“Once you say a parent must do what the state wants in an area it is not long before you have no rights at all in that area.”
OK Then I don’t want to be responsible for paying that parents’ medical bills when that child contracts a preventable disease. Let the child die at home with their parents watching.
You and me, too.
Have you thought this desire through?
This reminds me of a case in Indiana when I lived there. A local kid came down with diabetes. The family refused to go to a doctor and prayed for him. He died. I noticed that the father (in pictures) had glasses. Evidently medical devices were OK for him, but not the kid. He was let off with probation.
Cases like that are murder and the parents should be tried as such when they kill their kid. Including vaccinations.
And yes, it is not all in the parents heads, thing can and do go wrong from vaccinations. That is why they have you sign the disclaimer saying that you understand that things can and may go wrong before they vaccinate.
How about unless they are imminent danger of loss of life, limb or eyesight we keep out of it.
“Colorado has the sixth-highest rate of non-vaccinated public school kindergarteners”
Loony toon hippies abound in Colorado.
It’s pretty bad for us as a society and nation now in that many ostensible conservatives share the same irrational beliefs about vaccines.
No, I don’t want that power. The parents made that decision and I see no reason why I should have to pay for their decision. No punisment is involved. They got what they wanted.
That is attempting to punish them because they don't do things exactly as you want them too.
If the parents want to play with their kids lives, they have the right to do so. If they guess wrong and cause death or permanent injury to their kids because of their beliefs, they should be prosecuted just like an ordinary criminal.
I remember when I got the oral Polio vaccine and was glad to get it. I also remember that when there was a Polio outbreak in town, I could not go to the pool, the movie house, or any place else where there were a lot of people congregating. I also remember one kid in my grade school class who died from it.
How is it that a non-vaccinated child puts a Vaccinated child in danger???? I thought the vaccine protected the child from danger!
So what this tells me is that the vaccine does NOT protect the child from actual disease, at all! Because when outbreaks do occur, and they DO happen, it’s always the vaccinated kids who are at risk. Why is that? What’s wrong with this picture?
If they aren’t really protected, then why subject them to the risks of the vaccine?
Have you ever noticed that when vaccinated kids do get the disease, other vaccinated kids are sent home due to the risk?
Most people don’t realize that the chickenpox vaccine has been out for a very long time. It’s been used since the 1980’s. Some of my family members were innoculated with it, and were asked to keep quiet about it.
The biggest problem with regular measels is high temperature and dehydration. Today, we can deal with that easily. Not so years ago.
German measles are a breeze. Most of the time, you have NO clue you were even exposed and had the disease. The problem is when a pregnant woman is exposed. It raises hell with her unborn baby.
Diptheria is a killer. That’s one that even I think is a very good idea to be innoculated against.
The fist ‘’shots’’ of polio were ineffective, because they weren’t using a live vaccine. The non-live vaccine didn’t work. Later they came out with the live drops that were ingested orally, often placed on a sugar cube :)
My mother had a LOT of kids, so the clinic used to just send her home with the vial of polio vaccine so she could administer it to all of us at once...to save her some money and the hassel of trying to get all those kids ready to go somewhere.
I had most of the diseases growing up, and now I’m glad I did. I wasn’t unhappy about it then, either because what kid doesn’t want time out from school? Who cares if you’re sick? But I always envied the kids who got chicken pox because they got to go to the beach to dry out the sores. I never got chickenpox, and I’ve still never had them despite my advancing age lol! which means I won’t get shingles either.
I think there’s a lot to be said for natural immunities. As someone else mentioned, having the disease as children protects you in adulthood too. And who knows just how far those immunities go in protecting you from other unforseen things? Science really doesn’t have all the answers.
One thing we do know for sure is that injections are frequently contaminated. Polio was contaminated with cancer. google it.
Vaccines also contain ingredients known to cause harm..like mercury. They can also be contaminated with other diseases, or they can be completely ineffective so that you walk around ‘’feeling’’ protected..except you aren’t.
There ARE side effects from these vaccines, and when all these diseases are injected into a body..a vector that is NOT natural, the physical response isn’t going to be a natural one, either.
There are risks and benefits on both sides of the coin. But considering the integrity of government and medical/research professionals, today...the actual diseases are more honest and strait forward.
To vaccinate or not should be left in the hands of parents after careful investigation of the pros and cons. Medical proceedures should NEVER be forced on a person by government except in very rare and extenuating circumstances like quarentines and natural disasaters which are absollutely known to provoke deadly disease, and which can be handled locally.
One of the hallmarks of a free society is the right to refuse. It’s good to have the options, and it’s good to make one’s own decisions.
There clearly is a limit to the right of a parent regarding the treatment of their children. The question is where to draw that line.
For example, we require parents to feed and clothe their children — a parent can’t decide that their child does not need food, or does not need water, or does not need shelter.
Beyond that, most people would agree that a parent can’t refuse to give a child medicine for a known disease.
So where is the line? Can a parent refuse to take a child to the doctor if they are sick? Can a parent refuse an operation if a doctor says it is necessary? Can a parent refuse all vaccinations? Can they refuse some, but not others? Can they refuse ANY?
Can a parent refuse to teach their children at all, and refuse to send them to school? Can the state force kids to school, or do parents have the right to teach them at home? If so, can parents refuse to administer tests to children to show they are learning?
Does the state have some right to tell parents WHAT a child should eat? Or should parents have the right to feed their child anything they want?
I’m guessing that if we made a list of 20 things where the state wants to impose rules on parents, that even here at a conservative web site, we would not all agree on the correct answers for those 20 things.
At some point, children should have a right to receive appropriate medical treatment, regardless of how their parents feel. The question for me is HOW you determine what medical treatment must be given.
I’ve always felt a conflict when I’ve read of a small child dying because their parents had a religious belief that God would heal their child, and therefore refused to get treatment.
George Washington underwent a treatment for smallpox at his brother’s urging, as I recall. It was dangerous, but deemed worth the risk.
When I was a kid I suffered through mumps, measles and chicken pox. I would have been glad to have gotten a few shots. I heard that mothers used to organize sleep overs so that all kids would be infected at the same time; there was an inherent risk in that, one substantially greater than inoculation.
There’s one point I’m not sure about, but seems critical: are there added risks in having a segment of the population remain vulnerable? Could that pool of non-vaccinated people become a breeding ground where resistant strains could develop and infect the rest of us?
Like I say, I don’t know enough about epidemiology to say. I tend to think though that there is a possibility, and if so, vaccination should be mandatory.
I may be thinking of tuberculosis— until a few years ago considered nearly eradicated. The cause of the resurgence was not vaccination but irresponsible use of antibiotics and a population of people with compromised immune systems.
There may be a connection between this and vaccination, though indirect. For example, should people who refuse vaccination be offered free antibiotics if they become ill with any of those diseases?
I disagree with that statement. Government tells us to put on a seatbelt, and while I don't think they should, it is in your best interest to wear one. And government tells us to get health insurance, and again I don't want them to order me, but I think having health insurance IS the right thing for most people.
I have vaccinations from when I was a kid but those vaccines are different than what we are facing these days.
IN fact, most vaccinations today are much safer than the vaccines you took as a kid. We have advanced the science to a great degree. Maybe the discussion is more about vaccines for NEW things, rather than new vaccines for existing things.
And in large part, people blame vaccines for many things for which there is no real evidence. People don't do a good job of understanding causality.
Imagine that every day 1 kid randomly dies. So in one year, 365 kids are dead. Now, imagine that all those kids get a vaccination. What are the chances that at least one kid is going to die within 3 days of when they take the vaccine? Actually, it is pretty high. In fact, it is pretty likely that several of the kids will die within a few days of the vaccine.
So if 10 kids die within a week of taking the vaccine, that is 10 people who will claim the vaccine killed their kids. And they will point out that out of 365 kids, 10 died, which is like a 3% death rate, which is outrageous. But in fact, under this exercise, NONE of the kids died because of the vaccine. They would have died anyway.