Bill would abolish vaccination exemption for parents' personal beliefs

[Suzanimal]

Bill would abolish vaccination exemption for parents' personal beliefs

A group of state lawmakers announced legislation Wednesday that would abolish an exemption from the mandate that children get vaccinated before they enter school if it conflicts with their parents' personal beliefs.

Surrounded by mothers holding babies, five lawmakers said during a Capitol news conference that the legislation was needed to address a trend among many parents not getting their children immunized against common diseases and the spread of some preventable illnesses including measles and whooping cough.

"There are not enough people being vaccinated to contain these dangerous diseases," said Sen. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento), a pediatrician. "We should not wait for more children to sicken or die before we act."

Gov. Jerry Brown signaled that he was open to such a bill. "The governor believes that vaccinations are profoundly important and a major public health benefit and any bill that reaches his desk will be closely considered," said Evan Westrup, a spokesman for Brown.

The legislation does not address children who are completely home-schooled. It would still allow children to avoid vaccination for medical reasons including allergic responses and weak immune systems. The mandate only applies to children attending public or private schools.

Currently, 13,592 children have personal belief affidavits on file; of those, 2,764 were identified as based on religious beliefs. Pan said if the bill passes, the religious exemption would also disappear but he is open to a separate conversation on that issue.

The bill was drafted after 92 cases of measles have been reported in the state, most of them linked to visitors or employees at Disneyland or those who came in contact with them during the holidays.

Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica) is a co-author of the bill and said he was supporting it even though his district included pockets where many parents are not having their children immunized.

Currently, two states, Mississippi and West Virginia, do not allow exemptions except for medical reasons, and 46 states allow exemptions based on religious beliefs, according to Catherine Flores-Martin, Director of the California Immunization Coalition.

Any proposal to eliminate the personal belief exemption is “absolutely insane,” according to Alan Phillips, a North Carolina attorney who has represented clients in California and other states seeking exemptions.

Phillips said many parents were concerned about reports that vaccines can damage their childrens' health and they want more scientific proof of their safety. “Given the concerns that I have, one of which is this unknown about serious adverse events, collectively I have a concern that anybody would not have a right to make that decision for themselves and their children,” he said.

Pan has cited a state study indicating that in some communities in California more than 10% of parents are using the personal belief exemption to avoid the state’s vaccine mandates for their children.

“Vaccines prevent serious and potentially life-threatening diseases and parents deserve to know the rates at the school they trust to protect their child,” Pan said.

The new legislation would also require the notification of parents of the vaccination rates at their children's schools. It is supported by Kris Calvin, chief executive of the California chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Eliminating the personal belief exemption is opposed by Matthew B. McReynolds, senior staff attorney at the conservative Pacific Justice Institute, a Sacramento-based organization that advocates for parental rights and religious freedoms.

“Its concerning to me that the measles outbreak seems to have prompted some hysteria and this seems like a pretty sweeping approach to what really is a very limited problem that could be addressed in other ways,” McReynolds said.

He said the exemption is a compromise between public health experts and parents who have concerns about the side-effects and methods of manufacture of some vaccines.

“Wholesale doing away with that exemption eliminates the compromise and its regressive,” McReynolds said.


He also said parents who lose the ability to be exempted on religious grounds could have cause to challenge that change on grounds it violates their First Amendment rights.

“Its definitely something that could be subject to challenge and I think its an open question what the court would do with that,” he said.

Senate Republican leader Bob Huff of Diamond Bar said Wednesday that GOP lawmakers are very concerned about the recent outbreak of measles.

“While medical experts are overwhelmingly in agreement that vaccines are safe, preserving the freedom of choice has also emerged as part of this important discussion,” Huff said. “We look forward to reviewing the proposed legislation in detail and weighing what appropriate actions should be taken in the coming months."

http://www.latimes.com/local/politic...ren-story.html

[donnay]

SMDH.

[Natural Citizen]

“Its concerning to me that the measles outbreak seems to have prompted some hysteria and this seems like a pretty sweeping approach to what really is a very limited problem that could be addressed in other ways,” McReynolds said.

The only critical thought in that whole article that actually means something. There are soooo many evolving medical technologies that may deal with virus universally. And without all of the side effects of these medically obsolete and often dangerous products.

DRACOS (merely 1 evolving medical technology) are really going to revolutionize the means to approach virus in a universal way. But like McReynolds hinted...we don't want to discuss other ways. Now why is that? Any takers?

[DamianTV]

The Title should read Bill would abolish persons Right to Self Ownership and ALL Parental Rights.

Look at the life we offer for our children:

Mandatory Schooling
Mandatory Vaccinations
Mandatory Bicycle Helmets
Mandatory School Tracking outside of School (Social Media)
Mandatory Censorship (TV-PG, R-Rated movies)
Mandatory No Drinking / Smoking
Mandatory Sex Ed
Mandatory Parental Supervision
Mandatory No Running
Mandatory Food Compliance
Mandatory Curfew
Mandatory Segregation by Sex and Age
Mandatory No Swimming without a Lifeguard
Mandatory Dependancy on Authority
Mandatory College Enrollment (practically)
Mandatory Fear of Molestation / Brown People / Independence
Mandatory Child Safety Seats
Mandatory No Diving
Mandatory Fingerprinting
Mandatory Stupidity
Manddatory DNA Scanning
Mandatory Compliance
Mandatory Obedience to Assigned Group

And these all have Laws that punish the Disobedient Parent. We are destroying our childrens ability to be self reliant and independent adults, which I $#@!ing swear is exactly the goal. We are destroying EVERY form of Self Identity and replacing it with Corporate / State Laws that dictate every aspect of an Imposed Identity. Shut the $#@! up Number #3822-924-6134 and get your ass to your assigned Prison Block to receive your Mandatory Indoctrination / Innoculation or we will $#@!ing murder your piece of $#@! parens. Your Parents are the STATE. You must get on your knees and worship the STATE. STATE is your GOD. Repeat your Pledge of Allegiance to the STATE.

If you were born today, to be a child tomorrow, and become an adult as you progressively age, would this be the type of life you want to live? What kind of adult would you grow up to be? Will the State ever stop hiding behind children? When they demand to put Cameras in your house, will the Camera be MANDATORY for Parents to place a State Camera in their childs room? When does the No Vaccine Law become NO PARENTAL RIGHTS LAW?

Now tell me this is not a $#@!ing Police State.

[Natural Citizen]

Now tell me this is not a $#@!ing Police State.

Absolutely.

Hey, just for $#@!s n giggles, here are some other laws that I think are still on the books around town. Heh...

Greene, NY: It’s against the law to eat peanuts and walk backwards down the street while a concert is playing.

Massachusetts: At a wake, mourners may eat no more than three sandwiches.

Beech Grove, IN: It is forbidden to eat watermelon in the park.

Riverside, CA: One may not carry a lunch down the street between 11 and 1 o’clock.

Maryland: It’s against the law to eat while swimming in the ocean.

Marion, OH: It’s a violation to eat a donut while walking backwards.

Carmel, NY: It’s illegal to eat ice cream while standing on the sidewalk.

Rosemead, CA: Eating ice cream in public with a fork is prohibited.

California: It is illegal to eat an orange in your bath tub.

Boston: It is illegal to eat peanuts in church.

[Weston White]

They are really, hastily, really pushing this bollocks!

California vaccine bill stalls; will come back next week

It's generated such an angry debate that Pan has received added security. In addition to threatening messages sent to his office, opponents of the legislation have posted images online comparing Pan to Adolf Hitler.

I have been trying to write a letter to sent in about this bill, but everything is moving so fast, I cannot keep up! (I had only learned of this bill about 2-weeks ago.)

[Weston White]

California vaccine bill approved by committee on second try

Legislation requiring vaccinations for nearly all California schoolchildren revived Wednesday, winning the approval of a Senate committee that a week earlier looked poised to reject the measure.

Amendments giving non-vaccinated children more educational options beyond traditional schooling generated enough support to push Senate Bill 277 out of the Senate Education Committee on a 7-2 vote.

The bill heads to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the next step in a potentially long odyssey winding through several committees and floor votes in both the Assembly and Senate. Every Democrat on the Judiciary Committee is either a co-sponsor of the bill or has voted for it.

Still, they will wrestle with issues that could include whether an exemption for parents who object to vaccinations on religious grounds would be legally feasible. Multiple lawmakers said Wednesday that the legislation will require more changes if it is to make it to Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk and win his signature.

"This issue is more than vaccination verses non vaccination, its mandatory vaccination verses a more responsible vaccination," explained Jennifer Aleksic, left, of Folsom who came in opposition to SB277, a measure that will require California schoolchildren to get vaccinated, at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif. Wednesday, April 22, 2015. Holding carnations that represent children who have been injured or died from vaccinations she came with her daughter Kiley Michalec, 20, right. Michalec was vaccinated when she was 18 months old and 15 minutes after had a seizure and was sent to ER said Aleksic. The bill by Sens. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, and Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, was approved by the Senate Education Committee on a 7-2 vote after the authors made amendments that allows families who chose to not vaccinate to homeschool children together and allows independent study. The bill now goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"This issue is more than vaccination verses non vaccination, its mandatory vaccination verses a more responsible vaccination," explained Jennifer Aleksic, left, of Folsom who came in opposition to SB277, a measure that will require California schoolchildren to get vaccinated, at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif. Wednesday, April 22, 2015. Holding carnations that represent children who have been injured or died from vaccinations she came with her daughter Kiley Michalec, 20, right. Michalec was vaccinated when she was 18 months old and 15 minutes after had a seizure and was sent to ER said Aleksic. The bill by Sens. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, and Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, was approved by the Senate Education Committee on a 7-2 vote after the authors made amendments that allows families who chose to not vaccinate to homeschool children together and allows independent study. The bill now goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee. | Renee C. Byer rbyer@sacbee.com

“There’s a lot of work we still have to do,” Sen. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, said after the hearing.

While proponents frame SB 277 as a public health measure needed to protect Californians who are too young or sick to be immunized against diseases like measles and whooping cough, the bill faltered last week under questions about whether unvaccinated children could still exercise their constitutional right to an education. SB 277 would preserve medical exemptions but nix a broad personal belief exemption, prompting many parents to threaten to pull their children from school.

In the meantime, Allen of Santa Monica and Sen. Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, crafted amendments to placate skeptics. The changes expand the home-schooling and independent study options available to children who are not vaccinated and therefore cannot attend conventional public or private schools.

Now, unvaccinated children could get an education through private home-schools that cover multiple families – in the bill’s previous version only those serving a single family or household had qualified. The bill changes also clarified that unvaccinated kids could receive schooling through independent study programs that are overseen by school districts and given access to public school curricula.

“I appreciate your work to try and expand options for those who choose not to vaccinate to pursue the education of their children,” said Sen. Bill Monning, D-Carmel, while ensuring that for families of children with immune-compromising diseases like leukemia, “there are public schools where their children can attend without the risk of being exposed.”

Again and again last week, dissenters returned to that core tension: How to balance students’ ability to attend school without fear of infection against children’s fundamental right to an education.

“The amendments are an attempt to strike that balance,” Allen said. “This is a committee that cares about educational options for families, and they felt that we hadn’t adequately fleshed out certain aspects of the options we may provide for those families who choose not to vaccinate. We got through the committee today because the committee felt as though our amendments addressed the core concerns they had about access.”

The vote tally supported Allen’s contention. The committee’s chair, Sen. Carol Liu, D-La Cañada Flintridge, backed SB 277 after questioning last week whether public safety merited children leaving school. After expressing similar concerns last week, Sen. Loni Hancock, a Berkeley Democrat whose district houses many non-vaccinating families, voted in favor.

“I supported SB 277 because I strongly believe in the validity and importance of vaccinations,” Hancock said in a statement after the vote. “My concern has always been to ensure that all children have access to educational opportunities. I believe that the current bill, as amended, does a good job of balancing the state’s constitutional requirement to provide access to public education with the public health benefits of vaccinations.”

Still, the amendments did not convince lawmakers who worried that, given the burdens of home-schooling, some children would still struggle to obtain an education should the bill become law.

“I just still have a concern that this will not go far enough to help a two-income family who cannot home-school their child or a single working parent,” said Sen. Connie Leyva, D-Chino.

The Education Committee carried a different roster from the one that halted the bill last week. Gone was Senate Republican leader Bob Huff of Diamond Bar, who had said he could not support SB 277. His replacement, Sen. Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster, voted no. Appointed to fill a vacancy on the panel was Monning, who voted for the bill in its previous committee. He voted in favor again Wednesday.

Legislative leaders described the development as a routine product of the seat-shuffling set off by cascading rounds of elections. A new Democrat will soon fill an empty Senate seat in the 7th District. Runner recently won the seat that now-Rep. Steve Knight, R-Lancaster, vacated after he won a spot in Congress.

“At the beginning of the legislative year, Senate Republicans decided upon which committee posts they would take, with the understanding that two new Republicans would soon be taking office after they won special elections,” Huff spokesman William Bird said in a statement. “The understanding was that committee assignments would shift somewhat, when the two new members took office.”

But SB 277 opponents cried foul. A press release from the California Coalition for Health Choice denounced the change as “outright rigging the results of a vote.”

Wednesday’s vote offered none of the drama of the previous Senate Education Committee hearing, when SB 277’s authors agreed to delay a vote in the face of hours of stinging testimony and pointed questions from fellow legislators.

This time, no public testimony was allowed, though red-clad opponents still filled the hearing room. In numbers and vociferousness they have easily eclipsed proponents at hearings, though unvaccinated children account for a small minority of California youths.

Many of them attended Wednesday’s hearing carrying scarlet flowers, which they then delivered to the offices of Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles, and Senate Judiciary Committee chair Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, whose panel will hear the bill Tuesday.

Motivated enough to travel to a hearing where they would not be permitted to speak, critics said they planned to maintain their pressure on lawmakers.

“This is a terrible bill. It’s a ridiculous bill that needs to not pass,” said Joni Martin, who has selectively vaccinated her two children and departed from the Santa Cruz area before 5 a.m. to attend Wednesday’s hearing. “I’m going to come any time I need to come to listen to what they say, and I’m going to continue to work on getting the message out about all the reasons the bill is not justified.”

How they voted

Here is how the Senate Education Committee voted on Senate Bill 277:

Richard Pan, D-Sacramento Y

Carol Liu, D-La Cañada Flintridge Y

Bill Monning, D-Carmel Y

Andy Vidak, R-Hanford Y

Tony Mendoza, D-Artesia Y

Connie Leyva, D-Chino N

Marty Block, D-San Diego Y

Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster N

Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley Y

[donnay]

They just go against the people's will over and over again. SMDH.