Before you may act on your determination concerning your child's health, which conflicts with what the state of California feels is right for your child, then you are required to listen to a lecture from someone who the state of California believes holds greater wisdom than you do.
That's the essence of a new law, for which hearings were held yesterday
Perhaps one thing the sponsors of this bill hadn't considered was that a parent just might consult a health practitioner----to obtain "information regarding the benefits and risks of the immunization and the health risks of specified communicable diseases"----who happens to oppose vaccination. Such a clinician would likely suggest more "risks" associated with vaccination than "benefits".
Nevertheless, the bill itself is just another step towards big government control over our lives. The end of Federalism, as today's Supreme Court decision on "Obamacare" exemplifies. We learned today that there is no limiting principle in applications of the Commerce Clause (if government can get away with capriciously and laughingly define it as a tax) according to the majority, and according to some California legislators, there's no limiting principle to supersede freedom of conscience and religion.
Oh sure, you will get your freedom of conscience and religion. But only on the condition that you listen to the government's CORRECT view on the issue.
What if you feel you had already considered all relevant issues on the matter?
Sorry, that's not enough. The government knows best and the government's own view on the matter should prevail upon you, if you are a competent parent. It's the correct view. Why else would government mandate that you listen to it?
If this law is enacted, then the next logical law to enact would be one which penalizes a parent further for not accepting the government's correct view on vaccination.
Perhaps the penalty would be a fine? (Justice Roberts would likely redefine it as a tax, just to make the law appear Constitutional.) Or maybe the penalty would be having to attend parenting classes, as many parents are forced to do when they fail to adhere to the wisdom of Children's Services----such as feeding your kids cow's milk or meat or white bread, etc.?
Quote from bill support memo:
The bill would require, on and after Jan. 1, 2014 the [exemption request] letter or affidavit to be accompanied by a form prescribed by the State Department of Public Health that includes a signed attestation from a health care practitioner, as defined, that indicates that the health care practitioner provided the parent or guardian of the person, the adult who has assumed responsibility for the care and custody of the person, or the person, if an emancipated minor, who is subject to the immunization requirements with information regarding the benefits and risks of the immunization and the health risks of specified communicable diseases.UNQUOTE
The bill would require the form to include a written statement by the parent, guardian, other specified persons, or person, if an emancipated minor, that indicates that he or she received the information from the health care practitioner.
BILL NUMBER: AB 2109 AMENDED
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 20, 2012
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 23, 2012
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Pan
(Principal coauthor: Senator Wolk)
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Fuentes)
FEBRUARY 23, 2012
An act to amend Section 120365 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to communicable disease.
Gary Krasner, Director
Coalition For Informed Choice
188-34 87th Drive, Suite 4B
Holliswood, NY 11423
(note: there might be silence after you dial. But remain on the line. I can hear it ringing)
IF your message carries email attachments totalling over 3 MB is size, call me before sending it.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled" . . . Richard P. Feynman
I'm neither a lawyer nor medical physician. It should not be construed from any materials I distribute that I'm dispensing legal or medical advice.