CAN WE TRUST THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY WITH OUR KIDS?

Continued overreach, harmful missteps and lack of course correction deserves serious public scrutiny

Over the last five years, a clear pattern is emerging of public health policy and associated legislation aimed at isolating and forcing harms upon children. Why?

In 2016, MSNBC host Melissa Harris Perry made a concerning statement. Discussing public education, Harris Perry said, “We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families.”

It only took a short time before concepts like “kids belong to the community” were melded into “greater good” public health vaccination talking points from politicians deciding policy.

Since around 2015 heated debate spilled out into politics and legislation on whether or not parents should vaccinate their kids. That debate quickly devolved into whether parents should be removed from the picture entirely when it comes to vaccine decisions. The health community and government representatives are now deeming parents and the need for parental consent ‘a barrier to obtaining vaccination.’

During the 2019 legislative session, New York saw 17 democratic-sponsored vaccine-related bills, two aimed at eliminating the ‘barrier parent.’ One bill sought to allow any child who is at least fourteen years of age to consent to certain immunizations recommended without parental consent.

The other bill, which has been filed in each legislative session since 2009, but failed to move forward, would allow a health care practitioner to administer vaccines for sexually transmitted diseases to a minor without the parent’s consent or knowledge. Fortunately, there were enough medical freedom advocates left in the political mix that both New York bill pairs died in committees and failed to move forward at that time.

Washington D.C.’s B23-0171 (later named D.C. Law 23-193) was also active in 2019 and sought to add a new section into the existing regulations that would allow a minor child of any age, to consent to receive a vaccine. The bill, and its hearing, signaled a new high-water mark towards the removal of parents from some of their children’s most important medical decisions.

During the public hearing in June 2019 to discuss the act before it was signed into law, pediatrician Dr. Helene Felman, representing Washington D.C.’s chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), stated:

“As a pediatrician, I like the legislation as it stands because it offers the opportunity to capture those young adults who can make informed decisions at technically any age.”

Several other proponents of the bill who testified similarly danced around committing to an age they believed would be appropriate for a child to make their own medical decisions – ultimately 11 was decided upon. 

Fortunately, in a new legal victory halting D.C.’s overreach, a D.C. district judge issued a preliminary injunction against the act in favor of parents who brought suit. The parents filed complaints and were able to demonstrate that the act likely violates federal law.  

Medical institutions that should be preserving parental rights, true informed consent and strengthening both families and communities appear to be no longer doing so.

The American Medical Association (AMA) has thrown its full weight behind attempting to remove the parents from medical decisions involving their children.

At a policy meeting in 2019, the AMA announced it “will encourage state legislatures to establish comprehensive vaccine and minor consent policies.” The press release continues by stating the AMA “will support state policies allowing minors to override their parent’s refusal for vaccinations.”

The D.C. law is far from a one-off situation. In fact, there appears to be a concerted push from multiple angles attempting to force the idea of eliminating parents from medical decisions.

Current legislation in California would, if signed into law, allow minors 12 and older to consent to any vaccine approved by the Food and Drug Administration and recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

During the flawed COVID response by governments, it was shown that much of the lockdown and restrictive policies were aimed at protecting the laptop class at the expense of forcing children, the working class and the poor to carry the heaviest burdens. Those were the data-driven predictions of the Great Barrington Declaration early in October 2020 that were ignored by much of the medical and scientific classes – and have now come true.

Now we know, through exposed internal emails between U.S. health agency heads Francis Collins (NIH) and Tony Fauci (NIAID), that The Declaration was targeted at the highest levels to be viscously neutralized by a publicly emerging medical industrial complex with a Big Tech overlay no longer hidden in the shadows.

Purporting to protect the children, corporate media and health agencies like the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) incessantly used fear-based messaging to keep unscientific measures like school closings, masking children and widespread EUA COVID vaccines in place despite fully understanding the risks of the severe illness and mortality in kids…which was almost zero in health children. Data collected by the American Academy of Pediatrics shows that 0.00% to 0.01% of child COVID cases resulted in death.

Now we learn, thanks to the CDC’s antiquated and purposely flawed data collection system, that a sudden ‘revision’ of their data has hacked off COVID deaths in children by 24%!

Marty Makary MD, MPH @MartyMakary

CDC just revised down U.S. child Covid deaths by 25%. CDC, with 21K employees, still can't tell us how many were healthy, if any (Germany reported zero 5-17y.o.) or how many had nat imm? Studies suggest zero. How can anyone quantify risk in healthy kids with nat imm without data?

Nicole Saphier, MD @NBSaphierMD

The CDC has failed miserably in data collection and is finally beginning to correct a few of their errors that inflated Covid deaths in all ages, including kids. https://t.co/vlKX32gWK8

Meanwhile, the harms of the COVID shots, which in the case of just one safety signal of myocarditis discovered in kids, has many experts advising the waning benefits no longer outweighs the risks for mRNA COVID shots – especially in young boys.

Before entering into the COVID response, a 2019 Harvard study already found that suicide rates were soaring among teenagers. Yet politicians and public health officials ignored this readily available data to destroy the mental health of kids in order to further embark on an ill-fated lockdown experiment.

Even the WHO has been forced to concede that the COVID-19 pandemic [response] has triggers a 25% increase in prevalence of anxiety and depression worldwide with young people among the worst hit.

Despite many states dropping mask mandates for children in schools, many were slow to get the muzzles off the kids. A hot button topic among both parents and medical professionals, the politics of masking kids continues despite the lack of clear data.

To this day, New York City Mayor Eric Adams and his new health commissioner Dr. Ashwin Vasan are still telling children under 5 years old they should continue wearing masks.

Teachers around America are now witnessing massive learning setbacks, emotional stunting, anxiety disorders and slowed language development. The CDC, fully exposed during in the COVID era as being a weaponized political tool rather than a purely science-driven agency, quietly lowered the developmental goals for American kids at the exact time masks were being removed by the remaining state governors.

CDC LOWERS CHILDHOOD MILESTONES

So what do we do? First and foremost, a full accountability for the harms caused to children due to the reckless and unscientific lockdowns must be answered to. Any attempts at further lockdowns, re-masking of kids and school closures must not be allowed. From a legislative standpoint, laws must be put in place to counter any future attempts to impose harmful restrictions upon kids. Lawsuits have also proven highly viable options as we just witnessed in D.C.

After watching legislation to strip parents of their parental rights in D.C. and California, many states have authored counter legislation to oppose such actions in the future.

Alabama, Iowa, Missouri, and Michigan has various types of legislation being debated that directly aims to preserve parental consent over minor vaccination.