CALIFORNIA BILL AB 2109 - URGENT - Page 6

[ma2two]

Originally Posted by Taximom5 

It is not necessary to see a doctor to receive a vaccination. It's not even necessary to make an appointment. You can go to any Walgreen's, Target, K-Mart, or drugstore chain pharmacy department and receive a vaccination, without any counseling whatsoever on reaction risks. They will not ask if you have had a previous reaction; they will not tell you that vaccine-induced seizures can occur WEEKS after the vaccine; they will not tell you that vaccines can trigger autoimmune disorders; they will not tell you that 2000 cases of vaccine-induced brain damage have been admitted and compensated by the US government.

Excellent point. Any health care professional who is legally allowed to administer vaccines should be allowed to sign the form. For example, under the current bill, pharmacists would not be allowed to sign the form. Why not? If they give vaccines, surely they are qualified to discuss the risks and benefits of vaccines.

And if non-vaccinating parents are required to be counseled on the risks of not vaccinating, vaccinating parents should be required to be counseled on the risks of vaccinating.  Oh, right...they get VIS sheets (but not always). So why can't non-vaccinating parents simply be given a sheet to read and then sign that they have read it?

[eireann]

Originally Posted by ma2two 

And if non-vaccinating parents are required to be counseled on the risks of not vaccinating, vaccinating parents should be required to be counseled on the risks of vaccinating.  

I wrote that exact thing then saw you already wrote it. :)

[prosciencemum]

Originally Posted by ma2two 

And if non-vaccinating parents are required to be counseled on the risks of not vaccinating, vaccinating parents should be required to be counseled on the risks of vaccinating.  Oh, right...they get VIS sheets (but not always). So why can't non-vaccinating parents simply be given a sheet to read and then sign that they have read it?

That should form the information they are given on vaccination. I know it did when I got my kids vaccinated. 

In my opinion this is just about making it fair - either to vaccinate or not you have to go see a Doctor. I agree there is a cost associated with that, but that's true for so much about having children. And I don't want it to be cheaper for parents to not vaccinate so that they make a choice based on money saving rather than real personal beliefs. 

[prosciencemum]

An infographic on the vaccines this bill requires a signed exemption for, compared to the CDC recommendations

http://californianssupportingab2109.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/handy-infographic-cdc-recommended.html

Not this is from "Californians Supporting AB2109" blog, which you may disagree with, but the facts are the facts in the infographic.

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

That should form the information they are given on vaccination. I know it did when I got my kids vaccinated. 

In my opinion this is just about making it fair - either to vaccinate or not you have to go see a Doctor. I agree there is a cost associated with that, but that's true for so much about having children. And I don't want it to be cheaper for parents to not vaccinate so that they make a choice based on money saving rather than real personal beliefs. 

I don't think you should mandate it that people have to see a doctor or other healthcare provider when their child isn't sick.  Maybe they have better things to spend the money on - like food and rent.  I get you think everyone should talk to their doctor about vaccinating - but should and mandated are miles apart.

How healthcare in the USA works is that if you want it, you pay for it.  There are programs for low income families, etc, but that is the bottom line.  I do not see why someone should have to pay for a service (vaccine discussion) they are not interested in.

Personally, I think most healthcare, including vaccines, should be free.  Vaccines are a medical decision.  If a parent wants to vaccinate their kid, something like whether they can afford it should not enter into it. 

[ajsmom]

The Good Times wants to interview families in Santa Cruz county for an upcoming article about AB2109. This bill will require all parents who do not vaccinate to get a note from a doctor. If you wish to be interviewed for the article, please reply asap and I will give them your contact info.

Thanks,

Rebecca

[SweetSilver]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

  I get you think everyone should talk to their doctor about vaccinating - but should and mandated are miles apart.

[ma2two]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

In my opinion this is just about making it fair - either to vaccinate or not you have to go see a Doctor. 

How many doctors does a parent typically have to visit before finding one who will agree to vaccinate their child? How many doctors will a parent typically have to visit before finding one who will agree to sign the exemption form? Once such a doctor is found, will this doctor be more likely to accept insurance, just as likely to accept insurance, or less likely to accept insurance than a doctor who routinely vaccinates children?

[bri276]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 


That should form the information they are given on vaccination. I know it did when I got my kids vaccinated. 

In my opinion this is just about making it fair - either to vaccinate or not you have to go see a Doctor. I agree there is a cost associated with that, but that's true for so much about having children. And I don't want it to be cheaper for parents to not vaccinate so that they make a choice based on money saving rather than real personal beliefs. 

Which one is it- the nonvaxing parents are so overwhelmingly high income that it doesn't matter if they have to take time out of work or pay for a dr appt, or they're so low income they're not even going to vax their kid to save the money for one dr appt? As you pointed out, there are free clinics.

I think what people who fully vax might not realize is the usual response to registering your child for public school with an exemption. Dd1 has been in three different public schools on two different states and there was always a barrage of phone calls and questioning by the school nurse. Despite the fact that it is was always presented according to the letter of the law and no changes were needed.

[eireann]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 
 

In my opinion this is just about making it fair - either to vaccinate or not you have to go see a Doctor. 

Is something "unfair" now?  I am not understanding how exercising one's freedom to live or choose is unfair. Is it simply because those people are taking a different approach than you are? 

Should everyone have a psychiatric evaluation before they get married, take a job, buy shoes, go vegan, participate in extreme sports? Honestly, where does this mandating stop?

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

I agree there is a cost associated with that, but that's true for so much about having children. And I don't want it to be cheaper for parents to not vaccinate so that they make a choice based on money saving rather than real personal beliefs. 

Aside from making decisions for your own children, isn't that overstepping your bounds? It's really none of your or anyones business why people choose to do, well, anything, but in this case to vaccinate or not. If that's why they do it, that's why they do it and that's their right. 

Edited by eireann - 7/7/12 at 8:01pm

[prosciencemum]

Try to think about this all from the point of view of someone with no strong opinions on vaccination. In the previous CA system they could either 

(a) Get their kids vaccinated (either at a free clinic, or at a well child check), or have a medical exemption from the same place.

(b) Sign a piece of paper claiming a religious or medical exemption. 

If you're a busy parent (regardless of your economic status), with no strong views on vaccination, option (b) is much quicker and easier.... I can understand how it would be tempting. 

The current bill makes all the options equal in terms of amount of money and/or effort (ie. anywhere you can vaccinate you can get the exemption signed). That's why I think it's "fairer" (perhaps a bad choice of words). 

Yes these things are a hassle, but I am convinced the ultimate goal is to save children from vaccine preventable diseases (including those unable or unwilling to get the vaccine who will benefit from herd immunity). So I still think this bill is a good thing. And so much about parenting is a hassle - to my family this (which we do no have to do at the moment, as there are no such rules in the UK, but we have family in CA so it's no inconceivable we will in future) would be a drop of water in an ocean on draws on my time. 

[SweetSilver]

I have "no strong feelings about vaccination".  I am on the fence.  But I do have strong feelings about what falls within parental rights.  I think I might have mentioned this before, but I would agree that somewhere a line is drawn that a child must have medical attention over the objections of parents.  I have not worked out where that line is, but I do believe that a parent's to make medical decisions for their family is not absolute.  That said, I think that vaccinations are not even close to this line, though clearly others disagree.

This is not just about vaccinations.

[bri276]

You still have to have a health exam to submit the school health form to register, which contains much more than just vaccine records (see below). And if there is an outbreak if a disease for which your child is not immunized, you are required to keep them home, which is stated on the exemption.

So I seriously doubt laziness is a prime motivating factor in non compliance, esp. with the demographic of mostly older, richer, educated parents. And I don't think anyone else believes that, either. They're thinking one conversation with a ped or NP is going to change some minds. I think it will change very few, but most parents who don't vax already have to have these talks at every visit. Or maybe some docs and NPs will refuse to sign it even after the talk, which would be a major backfire that I can realistically see happening since many peds turn away nonvaxing families as it is.

I don't think it's the end of the world, but I think it's misguided and won't measurably increase compliance. Coverage is pretty good right now, anyway.

http://www.saratogausd.org/index.php/forms-flyers/doc_view/49-first-grade-health-check-up-form?tmpl=component&format=raw
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/ChildCareAndSchoolFactSheet2011-2012.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2011/p0901_cdc_nationalsurvey.html

[ma2two]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 
 anywhere you can vaccinate you can get the exemption signed

Not true. My guess is a minority of doctors and health care providers will be willing to sign the form. The actual percentage is unknown, of course, but it certainly won't be 100%.

Also, pharmacists are not allowed to sign the form, but they are allowed to administer vaccines.

[eireann]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Try to think about this all from the point of view of someone with no strong opinions on vaccination. In the previous CA system they could either 

(a) Get their kids vaccinated (either at a free clinic, or at a well child check), or have a medical exemption from the same place.

(b) Sign a piece of paper claiming a religious or medical exemption. 

If you're a busy parent (regardless of your economic status), with no strong views on vaccination, option (b) is much quicker and easier.... I can understand how it would be tempting. 

The current bill makes all the options equal in terms of amount of money and/or effort (ie. anywhere you can vaccinate you can get the exemption signed). That's why I think it's "fairer" (perhaps a bad choice of words). 

Yes these things are a hassle, but I am convinced the ultimate goal is to save children from vaccine preventable diseases (including those unable or unwilling to get the vaccine who will benefit from herd immunity). So I still think this bill is a good thing. And so much about parenting is a hassle - to my family this (which we do no have to do at the moment, as there are no such rules in the UK, but we have family in CA so it's no inconceivable we will in future) would be a drop of water in an ocean on draws on my time. 

I don't think I know a single parent who signs the exemption because "it's easy." Not one. Societally speaking, what lies ahead for those who have made this decision is anything but easy. It's the road much less travelled, and thus the road more challenging. However, I totally understand that since you do vaccinate your children, you have no idea how difficult it can be to have a child who isn't (or cannot be) vaccinated. This bill seems like no big deal as a result, probably, as it's in line with your beliefs and doesn't affect or pertain to you. You've never experienced that ignorant consternation regarding this issue, so this isn't something you can truly understand. An insider's perspective is much different, obviously, as they are affected by it directly. 

[thtr4me]

Anyone know the current status of this bill? I know a lot of bills are being shelved as the legislature attempts to get through as much as they can before the session ends. Hoping this one is one of them!

[ajsmom]

The bill was amended and passed by the senate yesterday.  It goes back to the house for another vote.  The bill now allows parents to visit the school nurse, a change to help parents who would have to pay to see a doctor.

 What is so hard is learning recently about how the drug companies have mislead the FDA about the efficacy of vaccines... the quality of ingredients has also been questioned. The fact that the FDA spied on their own employees who did not approve things automatically calls the entire approval process into question. All of our state legislators took contributions from the industry.

 

The folks who will really struggle with this are those who don't visit the doctor regularly AND are outside of the public school system. I can take my son to a school nurse for free since we are in a public school. Other parents will have to pay to see an approved doctor, unless their local school district will allow them to see the school nurse.

 

I am also curious how the state will enforce this with R-4 families. How can you keep kids from attending school at home if they don't have the form? Will CPS take them away from the home? If a publicly schooled child is at home/truant because the form has not been submitted, can the child be removed from the home by CPS? It makes no sense. Just like this bill.

 

I have spoken repeatedly with my senator's office and he still voted for it.  My assembly person has been equally responsive.

[thtr4me]

Gah. I just don't get how people can vote for crap like this. The vaccine industry really has done a great job pushing their agenda.

[Ramsmom]

Hello all... We may be moving to California soon and my son has only had a couple of shots.  He is two right now...what's the status on this -- anyone know?  This is crazy!

[ma2two]

Originally Posted by Ramsmom 

Hello all... We may be moving to California soon and my son has only had a couple of shots.  He is two right now...what's the status on this -- anyone know?  This is crazy!

This is going to pass. But they changed it so that you can now have a school nurse sign the form. I think that's a big improvement, because it would be free. But they're still not required to sign the form. At least you wouldn't have to pay anything to find out, though.