Our pediatrician's clinic has recently made it known to all their patients that they do not treat children who's parents refuse to vaccinate their children. I wonder how long it will take before they get sued?
:biggrin:You need more problems. I'll pray for you some.
I'm like Earle (but without any power) - it's one thing if it's in a post but the thread just jumps out at me and makes me scream.You need more problems. I'll pray for you some.
I see no grounds for a suit to lie at all...Our pediatrician's clinic has recently made it known to all their patients that they do not treat children who's parents refuse to vaccinate their children. I wonder how long it will take before they get sued?
I've already changed it to "whose." You can edit your own post to change "who's" to "whose."CA, would you mind making the correction please? For the record I simply was in a hurry and made a mistake and didn't proof read. But I'm sure that statement will be thoroughly refuted with a complete dissertation as to how that could not have been the case and that I simply have no concept of grammar and walk around licking windows, wiping drool from the side of my mouth and having my knuckles drag the ground.
#missingforestforthetrees
I know you're a smart guy, Buzz, and I've done it before.CA, would you mind making the correction please? For the record I simply was in a hurry and made a mistake and didn't proof read. But I'm sure that statement will be thoroughly refuted with a complete dissertation as to how that could not have been the case and that I simply have no concept of grammar and walk around licking windows, wiping drool from the side of my mouth and having my knuckles drag the ground.
#missingtheforestforthetrees
I figured as easy as it is for anyone to sue that this one would fall into that category. Do you think if more clinics start doing this the government will get involved?I see no grounds for a suit to lie at all...
I'm from Mississippi so you're safe.I know you're a smart guy, Buzz, and I've done it before.
It's just I guess I've got a little bit of that hyper-sensitivity with all the jokes about Alabamians being stupid. But hey, it's fixed. RTR
On the suit, kids without vacs don't fall into any of the protected classes under the '64 Act, as amended, so they can be discriminated against. Not my area of law, but I don't know if Medicare could make them do it in order retain reimbursements. Anyway, I would think the government would put its thumb on the scales on the side of trying to force vaccinations. (The same thing the docs are trying to do)I figured as easy as it is for anyone to sue that this one would fall into that category. Do you think if more clinics start doing this the government will get involved?
We've got several couples that go to our church who do not believe in vaccinations. It is a very awkward situation right now because we've got a nursery with babies who've yet to have all their shots. There are parents complaining to the church that their babies are at risk because these kids (the ones without vaccinations) are in close proximity to the nursery every Sunday and Wednesday night.On the suit, kids without vacs don't fall into any of the protected classes under the '64 Act, as amended, so they can be discriminated against. Not my area of law, but I don't know if Medicare could make them do it in order retain reimbursements. Anyway, I would think the government would put its thumb on the scales on the side of trying to force vaccinations. (The same thing the docs are trying to do)
Heh, when has that ever stopped one.I see no grounds for a suit to lie at all...
It's a thorny problem and I agree with BnB; I would favor strong government action. Traditionally, the government has had draconian power, where the public health is concerned. Witness the forced quarantine (life sentence) of Typhoid Mary. I think it is such a hot button issue that pols don't want to take it up. There's nothing harder to stamp out than superstition, and this is one of them - fearing a substance no longer in vaccines and autism - which has repeatedly been scientifically disproven. Hell, more people believe in ghosts than believe in God...We've got several couples that go to our church who do not believe in vaccinations. It is a very awkward situation right now because we've got a nursery with babies who've yet to have all their shots. There are parents complaining to the church that their babies are at risk because these kids (the ones without vaccinations) are in close proximity to the nursery every Sunday and Wednesday night.
No one should force a parent to inject their kids with a "potentially" dangerous substance or force them to take medications or treatments against their beliefs either. (I vaccinated my children, but I respect parent's rights and individual's rights who choose not to.)Everybody knows I can be pretty anti-government, but the vaccination thing is one area where I wouldn't mind some iron-fisted action. Kids shouldn't die from measles in 2014.
Yeah, I'm not big on government mandates but when it comes to something like this I believe I'll gladly make an exception. Unfortunately we (society) are seeing an ever growing number of parents who are buying into this myth and putting others at great risk.It's a thorny problem and I agree with BnB; I would favor strong government action. Traditionally, the government has had draconian power, where the public health is concerned. Witness the forced quarantine (life sentence) of Typhoid Mary. I think it is such a hot button issue that pols don't want to take it up. There's nothing harder to stamp out than superstition, and this is one of them - fearing a substance no longer in vaccines and autism - which has repeatedly been scientifically disproven. Hell, more people believe in ghosts than believe in God...
Those very same parents shouldn't force the presence of their children upon others causing risk and harm to society as a whole. What makes me angry is that technically children whose parents choose to use an exemption are not required to notify nor is the school able to notify the parents of other children that there is a potential ticking time bomb running around the schoolyard.No one should force a parent to inject their kids with a "potentially" dangerous substance or force them to take medications or treatments against their beliefs either. (I vaccinated my children, but I respect parent's rights and individual's rights who choose not to.)
Why is it ok for someone else to potentially endanger your child because of their beliefs?ADPH said:A written objection from the parent or guardian of a student or child based on religious tenets and practices shall be submitted in person by the parent or guardian to the County Health Department for issuance of a Certificate of Religious Exemption from the required immunizations or testing. A licensed physician can provide individual exemption from he required immunizations or testing on a Certificate of Medical Exemption. The Certificate of Religious Exemption and the Certificate of Medical Exemption will be on forms approved by the Alabama Department of Public Health and will be accepted in lieu of the Certificate of Immunization.
I wrote a paper on this in med school. The basic law that was argued in 1944 said that a parent has a perfect right to make himself a martyr for his religion but not his child. And then there's the duty to society you're talking about.Those very same parents shouldn't force the presence of their children upon others causing risk and harm to society as a whole. What makes me angry is that technically children whose parents choose to use an exemption are not required to notify nor is the school able to notify the parents of other children that there is a potential ticking time bomb running around the schoolyard.
From the Alabama Department of Public Health
With regards to what vaccines are required and what is needed to be exempt from the state of Alabama's policy.
Why is it ok for someone else to potentially endanger your child because of their beliefs?