Suitable Cop Jumps In, Stops awful Cop from Attacking the harmless Handcuffed man

On Tuesday, the 17th of November, the District of Columbia will finalize a bill that might flout existing Supreme Court precedent and greatly diminish parental rights regarding a minor’s healthcare. The Minor Consent for Vaccinations Amendment Act (Bill 23-171) will allow children as young as 11 to consent on their own in relation to receiving vaccinations. Their parents won't learn.

The bill will declare, “A minor, eleven years old or older, may consent to receive a vaccine where the minor is capable of meeting the consent standard, and also the vaccine is usually recommended by U. S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)…”

To meet the “informed consent standard,” the bill says the minor must be “able to grasp the requirements for, the character of, and any significant risks ordinarily inherent within the medical aid.”

However, the bill doesn't establish exactly who would determine if the kid is in a position to grasp these factors, nor does it state that the kid is told that vaccines, though generally safe, don't seem to be risk-free.

Supreme Court precedent has been clearly established and has held for many years that oldsters have both the duty and also the right to direct the care, custody, and control of their minor children. This bill is in direct conflict with said Supreme Court precedent and contrary to the U.S. Constitution.

In fact, in its 1979 Parham v. J.R. decision, the Supreme Court declared that the state cannot make these decisions:

“Simply because the choice of a parent isn't agreeable to a toddler, or because it involves risks, doesn't automatically transfer the facility to form that call from the fogeys to some agency or officer of the state. the identical characterizations are often made for a tonsillectomy, appendectomy, or another process. most kids, even in adolescence, simply don't seem to be able to make sound judgments concerning many choices, including their need for medical aid or treatment. Parents can and must make those judgments.”

The state taking parental rights away and allowing impressionable children to be guided by government motives may be a terrifying notion. Nevertheless, the bill passed the previous votes with only one dissenting voice from Councilmember Trayon White Sr. (D-Ward 8).

“Parents have a fundamental right to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children,” White said, occurring to say that vaccines, which are generally safe, do pose a possible risk to children’s health. White cited the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program to argue that vaccines aren't entirely safe.

Though the NVIC program is downplayed by those that ignore the vaccine companies’ own warnings on the inserts of each drug, the very fact remains that in mere 13 years, thousands of settlements are awarded, totaling over $4.2 billion in payouts.

“Medical professionals and schools shouldn't be permitted to coerce impressionable minors into procedures capable of causing injury or death behind their parents’ back,” White said. “There are comments about the Centers for Disease Control having [approved] these said vaccinations. For me, it’s not a problem with vaccination. It’s a difficulty of the council voting to avoid the inclusion of a parent making a choice about their child.”

We agree.

But this bill gets worse. Not only does it remove the proper of the parent to create the judgment for his or her child, but it also establishes a technique to stay it secret from them while still charging their insurance.

The bill specifies that insurance providers shall seek reimbursement from the insurer without parental consent so that they “shall not send a proof of Advantages (EOB) for services provided” under the bill.

What’s more, the bill essentially requires the falsification of the child’s medical records regarding vaccinations by requiring the health care provider administering the vaccines to “leave the immunization record partly 3 blanks, and…submit the immunization record on to the minor’s school.” The records would then be kept at the varsity and therefore the parents wouldn't have access.

“The school shall keep this immunization record confidential, except it should share the record with the Department of Health or the school-based health facility.”

Here at the rationalism Project, we aren't “anti-vaxxers” but rather advocate for consent and vaccine safety. This bill flies within the face of both of those. it'll choose a vote on November 17 and can possibly be approved.

If this blatant attack on parental rights isn’t called come in D.C., rest assured it'll spread to other states and this slippery slope could remove parental rights entirely, delivering parental duties to the state — a terrifying thought indeed.