Open cps case-- indiana state laws for vaccination? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 13 Old 10-05-2009, 07:51 PM - Thread Starter
 
the_juniper_tree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Some fool called CPS (for medical neglect) and now there is a case open on my family. i need to know what the state laws in Indiana are for vaccination, as my son is VERY selectivly vaxed. Please help. This info is needed ASAP. Thanks in advance.
the_juniper_tree is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 13 Old 10-05-2009, 08:03 PM
 
mysticmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwi....processSearch

Quote:
Exceptions
Citation: Ann. Code §§ 31-34-1-12; 31-34-1-14; 31-34-1-15

A child is not a child in need of services if:
The presence of a controlled substance was from a valid medical prescription.
A parent fails to provide specific medical treatment for a child because of legitimate and genuine religious beliefs. This presumption does not do any of the following:
Prevent a court from ordering medical services when the health of the child requires it
Apply to situations in which the child's life or health is in serious danger

hh2.gif

mysticmomma is offline  
#3 of 13 Old 10-05-2009, 08:05 PM
 
mysticmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org...trics;99/2/279


Quote:
Preventive Care

Some religious tenets hold that members should not seek or receive medical care for any condition, including pregnancy. These beliefs can result in increased perinatal and maternal mortality.8 Some religious groups deny children the benefits of routine preventive care. For example, some parents, acting in accord with state laws, refuse to have their children immunized because of religious beliefs. The AAP does not support the stringent application of medical neglect laws when children do not receive recommended immunizations. Although the risk to unimmunized individuals is relatively low, serious adverse reactions to vaccination are rare and the AAP strongly endorses universal immunization. Recent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases, with consequent serious complications and deaths, have been linked to groups that refused immunization for religious reasons.9-12

hh2.gif

mysticmomma is offline  
#4 of 13 Old 10-05-2009, 08:07 PM
 
mysticmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
mysticmomma is offline  
#5 of 13 Old 10-05-2009, 08:09 PM
 
mysticmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
can you give ages of your kids?

hh2.gif

mysticmomma is offline  
#6 of 13 Old 10-05-2009, 08:10 PM
 
mysticmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Also start a file if you can of all medical care you have obtained for your kids.

hh2.gif

mysticmomma is offline  
#7 of 13 Old 06-06-2010, 01:37 PM
 
mbsmallwood76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What about when the medication that they are trying to force on my 3 year old daughter is not medically necessary? My daughter has labial adhesion and they are trying to give her Premarin for weeks in order to complete an exam to prove that she hasnt been abused. I filed a petition for temporary injunction at the same time DCS filed an order to authorize medical treatment. Any advice?
mbsmallwood76 is offline  
#8 of 13 Old 06-07-2010, 03:25 AM
 
heathergirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbsmallwood76 View Post
What about when the medication that they are trying to force on my 3 year old daughter is not medically necessary? My daughter has labial adhesion and they are trying to give her Premarin for weeks in order to complete an exam to prove that she hasnt been abused. I filed a petition for temporary injunction at the same time DCS filed an order to authorize medical treatment. Any advice?
Poor baby! What happened? From my understanding, Premarin is used in menopausal women. It contains estrogen. I understand that your daughter's injury is to her labia. How severe is it? It seems to me that it should be allowed to heal on its own. If it needs anything, it would probably be something that would encourage healing of skin- from anywhere on the body. I don't see why a 3 y/o would need any hormones. Just because your labia is injured doesn't mean that it messes with your hormones, does it? Did your doctors give any reasons why they want to use that? I'm so sorry for you and your DD! What a terrifying experience for you both.
heathergirl67 is offline  
#9 of 13 Old 06-07-2010, 05:27 AM
 
Oubliette8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heathergirl67 View Post
Poor baby! What happened? From my understanding, Premarin is used in menopausal women. It contains estrogen. I understand that your daughter's injury is to her labia. How severe is it? It seems to me that it should be allowed to heal on its own. If it needs anything, it would probably be something that would encourage healing of skin- from anywhere on the body. I don't see why a 3 y/o would need any hormones. Just because your labia is injured doesn't mean that it messes with your hormones, does it? Did your doctors give any reasons why they want to use that? I'm so sorry for you and your DD! What a terrifying experience for you both.
Labial adhesions are quite common in young girls- basically the labia fuses together. Application of a hormone cream will cause the labia to separate although they often fuse back together when treatment is stopped. Most girls outgrow the condition as the approach puberty and their own hormone levels rise, causing the adhesions to separate naturally. Hormone treatment is NOT necessary so long as the girl can toilet normally. My guess is, they want to perform a genital exam, but because the labia are fused, they cannot get a good view of the genitals. this seems a bit useless because after weeks have passed, if the little girl was being sexually abused, it would be unlikely that any physical injury or evidence remained any way. Can you get a second opinion from a doctor who agrees with you? Have you hired a lawyer? It seems their suggestions are outside of well documented evidence, and most of this is more mainstream knowledge.
Oubliette8 is offline  
#10 of 13 Old 06-07-2010, 07:15 AM
 
heathergirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Wow, I had never heard about that! I agree about the visible trauma thing, though. I know that even when labial adhesions aren't an issue it can be hard to tell if a child has been sexually abused or not because there often aren't physical marks. Usually any swelling goes down within 24 hours. Let alone weeks. I'm wondering just what they think they'll find in a few weeks?
heathergirl67 is offline  
#11 of 13 Old 06-07-2010, 10:52 AM
 
harli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NEPA
Posts: 120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Wow, Sorry your going through this Mama.

While I think it's perfectly acceptable to not want to give your little girl hormones maybe you can state that in addition to that you are against Premarin in general because it is made unethically?

Premarin is made from Pregnant Mare Urine (which is where they get the name of the drug). You could claim that you are ethically against the drug because it adds more horses to a world with too many horses as it is and that you don't believe the mares are cared for in an ethical way while they are collecting the urine.

It may sound funny but there is a huge debate about Premarin in the equine world. I realize you have every right to not want to give your daughter this drug as it is but maybe this info will give you one more piece of ammunition.
harli is offline  
#12 of 13 Old 06-07-2010, 05:38 PM
 
Emmeline II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,558
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There is nothing in Indiana vaccine law that even touches on this.
http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/sta...s/indiana.aspx

http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwi....processSearch

Vaccines are not "medical treatment", they are prophylactics (preventative); it is not as if your are denying an insulin dependent child, insulin.

Assuming you were reported for non-vaccination: It is not medical neglect to KNOWLEDGEABLY not vaccinate your children (as opposed to "what's vaccination? can't be important, oh well"). It is (still) your right as a parent to chose whether or not to vaccinate; vaccinations are only "necessary" for school (or a religious exemption).

I haven't been in this position, but I might say "I continually research the topic of vaccination and have choosen to selectively vaccinate my child. Our doctor is aware of our choice." I might add that "it is not medical neglect to choose to parent my child in way that is not in agreement with my family or neighbors." I'd take your child for a well-visit ASAP though.

Child Abuse and Neglect Statues
http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwi...tate/index.cfm

Quote:
http://sayingnotovaccines.blogspot.c...regarding.html
The Arizona State Court of Appeals has slapped down efforts by Child Protective Services to have a youngster in foster care immunized over a parent's objections....

Potentially more sweeping, the judge said the laws that allow the state to take temporary custody of a child specifically spell out what powers and responsibilities that includes. These range from the right of physical custody and the right to discipline the child to the requirement to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter and medical care. Eckerstrom said anything not on that list remains the right of the biological parent.

Find a Lawyer referral under "Services" (link usually doesn't work so cut and paste if necessary).
http://www.falseallegation.org/

Parents Guide to Dealing With CPS

http://www.familyrightsassociation.c...parents_guide/
Fighting Child Protective Services False Accusations
http://www.fightcps.com/

CPS Watch -- Legal Forms
http://web.archive.org/web/200306021...ms/default.asp

"It should be a rule in all prophylactic work that no harm should ever be unnecessarily inflicted on a healthy person (Sir Graham Wilson, The Hazards of Immunization, 1967)."
Emmeline II is offline  
#13 of 13 Old 06-07-2010, 10:03 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Please remember that this forum is for discussion regarding selective & delayed vaccination. Discussion regarding health conditions should be continued in our Health & Healing forum. Any further off-topic posts will be removed.
amnesiac is offline  
Reply

User Tag List



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off