New California vaccination laws are in children’s best interest

In Opinion
Starting July 2016, religious or personal beliefs will no longer be considered exemptions for school vaccinations in California. This new mandate will help to ensure that California’s public schools are healthy and safe for students. (Natalie Goldstein / Daily Titan)
Starting July 2016, religious or personal beliefs will no longer be considered exemptions for school vaccinations in California. This new mandate will help to ensure that California’s public schools are healthy and safe for students.
(Natalie Goldstein / Daily Titan)

Protecting children’s health is a compelling government interest that justifies California’s new law to no longer exempt children from being vaccinated for religious beliefs or personal reasons. Overbearing parents should put their beliefs to the side and appreciate the effort California is making to protect their children’s health.

Currently, parents are able to cite personal beliefs and religious objections to exempt their children from immunization requirements in private or public schools (K-12) and day cares. However, beginning July 1, 2016, Senate Bill 277 (SB 277) will no longer allow schools to enroll a student up to seventh grade without being vaccinated regardless, of religious or personal beliefs.

SB 277 will still accept medical circumstances for a child in school not to be vaccinated as long as the parents present a written statement from a licensed physician. If a physician indicates that a vaccine could potentially harm the child because of the child’s family medical history, that child would be admitted into school without a vaccination.

Medical exemptions should ease the minds of worried parents who are leery of certain vaccinations because of their child’s medical record.

This bill is not as intimidating as opponents make it seem. It is the school’s responsibility to ensure a healthy learning environment for its students.

However, people who are against the bill, such as the California Coalition for Vaccine Choice, claim this law infringes on their religious liberty.

Luckily, this isn’t the first time that public health statutes have come up against opposition, and that means there’s precedence.

On Jan. 1, 1944, Justice Wiley B. Rutledge delivered the majority opinion in the case Prince v. Massachusetts, and claimed that the government has the power to regulate the children’s treatment, regardless of the parents’ religious beliefs.

“Thus, (a legal guardian) cannot claim freedom from compulsory vaccination for the child more than for himself on religious grounds,” reads the court opinion. “The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death.”

One parent’s skepticism toward vaccinations may be costly for the entire school population.

Protecting children’s well-being is a top priority for the government, especially with the rise of diseases such as pertussis, also known as whooping cough, in California.

In 2014, a total of 11,219 whooping cough cases were reported, the most in the last decade. There were also 75 reported cases of the measles, according to the California Department of Public Health.

Parents against the measure are worried about the government having too much power over their children’s health, but they fail to show any other alternatives. The rise in cases of measles show that parents lack the power to protect their children from every harmful disease. The only thing they do control is the vaccinations their children receive and whether or not they take them to the doctor.

Surely children are not enthusiastic about getting poked in the arm with a needle, nor are they excited to take exams or learn long division, but they have to put their misery aside. Just as students must trust their educators, parents must trust the medical professionals who have revolutionized the world of medicine to help eradicate diseases.

Society can only improve if its members work together. Students receive their education to become well-rounded citizens. Parents and schools work together to provide a healthy atmosphere in which every student can prosper.

With a population of more than 38.5 million, it’s no wonder that the state government is taking new measures to prevent epidemics, especially in its schools.

In 1997, California stepped up to the plate to prevent hepatitis B from spreading by mandating hepatitis B vaccines for children in day care and elementary school, and then later for middle school children in 1999.

There were 108 reported cases of hepatitis B last year, according to the California Department of Public Health.

California is one of at least 12 states to consider reforming their vaccine-exemption legislation this year, but issues regarding the state’s power to enact vaccination procedures has become transhistorical.

In 1902, during the outbreak of smallpox, a Swedish man by the name of Henning Jacobson refused to be vaccinated and took his case to Supreme Court. In 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts, Justice John M. Harlan delivered an opinion that said states have the authority to require vaccinations.

“While we do not decide and cannot decide that vaccination is a preventive of smallpox, we take judicial notice of the fact that this is the common belief of the people of the State, and with this fact as a foundation we hold that the statute in question is a health law, enacted in a reasonable and proper exercise of the police power,” Harlan said.

Families may hold their religious views as they wish, but it is for the good of their children and public schools that they follow the new vaccination mandates.

One commentOn New California vaccination laws are in children’s best interest

  • “vaccination laws are in children’s best interest”

    These laws are in the best interest of the pharmaceutical industry who is projected to earn an estimated $57.8 billion by 2019 and is projected to grow to $100 billion by 2025 of just vaccines.

    -There is not one Independent double-blind, placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

    -There is not one independent scientific study or evidence on ANY kind which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?

    -There is no scientific evidence which can prove that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was attributable to inoculation of populations

    *CDC has not & can not provide any scientific justification as to how injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human health and prevents disease. Vaccines have the following ingredient in them:
    -WI-38 human diploid cellsWI-38 fibroblasts are derived from tissues of a fetus aborted in 1964, MRC-5 cells-the cells are grown in culture, and then distributed widely. J.P. Jacobs originated this cell line in September of 1966. The cells were taken from the tissue of an aborted fetus.
    -Recombinant Human Albumin: The MMR vaccine contains genetically engineered human albumin, the most common protein found in blood. The FDA warns that all drugs containing human albumin could have the possibility of prion or viral disease
    contamination.

    These cells, however small the amount, has the DNA still attached and there has been no studies to determine what kind of damage it causes. Vaccine makers don’t even know. Vaccine Pro-Con and “Fear of the Invisible by Janine Roberts (amazon) & a chapter here: The dangerous impurities of vaccines- http://medicalveritas(dot)com/Janine.pdf. Roberts is an award winning investigative journalist that spend over a decade investigating and documenting the intricacies
    & problems encountered by scientist in the vaccine industries in the
    US and Europe. In her books: “Fear of the Invisible” and “The Vaccine
    Papers” she provides documents, interviews and narratives from the worlds vaccine makers. She names sources and provided links to government documents (that are public records) and copies of documents.

    -Animal Ingredients: The MMR vaccine includes ingredients derived from poultry and cows. The measles and mumps viruses are cultivated in cultures of chick embryonic cells while the growth medium for all three viruses contains fetal bovine serum.
    Vaccines also include: gelatin, sorbitol, sodium chloride, bovine cow serum, egg protein, formaldehyde, phenoxyethanol and aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, MSG,

    CDC has not:
    -provided a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the intended goal of preventing disease.
    -provided Independent scientific justification on how bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning and prevents future infections.

    Most of all the CDC has not provided:
    -scientific justification on how a vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating.

    If you’ve been following the vaccine controversies the last few years the CDC has multiple excuses as to why there continue to be outbreaks of Measles, Mumps & Whooping Cough saying that “unvaccinated children are causing outbreaks and putting vaccinated children at risk” -which is probably the most ludicrous excuse invented yet it was chanted by celebrity doctors and online trolls to the point where intelligent people were actually believing it. If vaccines work than why would this happen? The next excuse is not enough children are vaccinated yet according to their own data yet as of 2013 95% of the children in the US have had the required number of MMR vaccines. DPT rates are also over 90% so that dog don’t bark.

    The newest excuse as to why outbreaks of Measles, Mumps & whooping cough are happening in highly vaccinated population is that the viruses in vaccines are mutating. Great excuse except from the inception of the practice of vaccination-viruses in the vaccine seed stock and it solution made from it have always mutated. It’s not a new phenomenon. In the books by Roberts scientist openly talk about it and how the public wasn’t alerted to various mutations over the years by The WHO & the CDC-they just kept giving the shots. They know these mutations cause diseases but are unable to purify the vaccine solution. Want to know why there are so many sick children and so many unusual disease affecting people today-read the books.

    Vaccine laws are only in the best interest of the pharmaceutical company, CDC, WHO, IOM, FDA, IOH and various other agency related groups because it is not illegal for employees of these agencies to own stock in pharma. The US Congress allows it.

Comments are closed.

Mobile Sliding Menu