New bill restricting vaccination exemption in CA

[formedbrds]

California vaccination Bill Ab 2901 (as amended 4/23/12) will be voted on this week! It restricts the vaccine exemption by requiring a doctor signature. Is it ok for me to post a summary of the bill and the representatives contact info for parents to call and voice opposition? Calls need to be made by Tuesday.

 

California was already hit hard with a new law that now allows schools to vaccinate for HPV without parents knowledge or consent, which is why I feel it important for parents to let their representative know that these kind of attacks on vaccine exemptions is not acceptable.

[PowPow]

I hope everyone is paying attention to this! I am sure many of us have varying political leaning, but we can all agree on trying to get our kids better and our ability to be in charge of their medical care is the only way most of them will get better. It is the truth.

 

Please, if you live in CA, pay attention to this!

 

I live on the "right" coast, both geographically and politically

but I am watching this closely. We all need to pay attention to our rights, as they are very quietly eroding, especially our rights as parents.

 

I do not even know where I stand on the vaccine issue. I do not want to vaccinate my next child, but honestly, I am afraid of the backlash of my family doctor. I DO believe he has the right to refuse care to me for that purpose, just as I have the right to seek care where I want and how I want. I just really like him...

 

Before I get too off-topic, THANK YOU... FORMEDBRDS for posting this!

[formedbrds]

Well, I'll assume it is OK to post. Please call before 3:00 PDT May 1 in order for your voice to be heard.

 

Bill: AB 2109 (as amended 4/23/12)

 

Author: State Assemblymember Richard Pan

 

Status: Hearing set for Wednesday, May 2, 2012 in California State Assembly Appropriations Committee.

 

Summary of Concern:

AB 2109 creates a new additional requirement for parents who choose to use the current personal beliefs waiver to exempt their child from one or more of the vaccinations required for school enrollment. AB 2109 would require a parent to obtain the signature of a doctor, stating that he has provided the parent with information about the benefits and risks of vaccinations, and about specified communicable diseases, before his or her child would be exempted. This would apply to all children regardless of what type of school they are in, including a private homeschool. The personal beliefs waiver, by itself, would no longer be enough. In short, AB 2109 would diminish parental rights by effectively requiring parents to receive what will be viewed as a “permission” from a doctor to not vaccinate their child.

 

 

Call Immediately: (No later than 3:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 1) the member of the Assembly Appropriations Committee according to the first letter of your last name as indicated in the alphabetized list below.

 

Tell Them:

 

“Please vote no on AB 2109 (by Pan). I oppose requiring parents to arrange an office visit to obtain a doctor’s signature as a new condition for exempting their child from vaccinations.”

 

please call the member of the Assembly Appropriations Committee according to the first letter of your last name as indicated in the following list:

 

California State Assembly Committee on Appropriations

A

Felipe Fuentes (Chair) (D)

Phone: 916-319-2039

Fax: 916-319-2139

 

B

Diane Harkey (Vice-Chair) ®

Phone: 916-319-2073

Fax: 916-319-2173

 

C

Robert Blumenfield (D)

Phone: 916-319-2040

Fax: 916-319-2140

 

D

Steven Bradford (D)

Phone: 916-319-2051

Fax: 916-319-2151

 

E–F

Charles Calderon (D)

Phone: 916-319-2058

Fax: 916-319-2158

 

G

Nora Campos (D)

Phone: 916-319-2023

Fax: 916-319-2123

 

H

Mike Davis (D)

Phone: 916-319-2048

Fax: 916-319-2148

 

I–J

Tim Donnelly ®

Phone: 916-319-2059

Fax: 916-319-2159

 

K

Mike Gatto (D)

Phone: 916-319-2043

Fax: 916-319-2143

 

L

Isadore Hall (D)

Phone: 916-319-2052

Fax: 916-319-2152

 

M

Jerry Hill (D)

Phone: 916-319-2019

Fax: 916-319-2119

 

N–O

Ricardo Lara (D)

Phone: 916-319-2050

Fax: 916-319-2150

 

P–Q

Holly Mitchell (D)

Phone: 916-319-2047

Fax: 916-319-2147

 

R

Jim Nielsen ®

Phone: 916-319-2002

Fax: 916-319-2102

 

S

Chris Norby ®

Phone: 916-319-2072

Fax: 916-319-2172

 

T–V

Jose Solorio (D)

Phone: 916-319-2069

Fax: 916-319-2169

 

W–Z

Donald Wagner ®

Phone: 916-319-2070

 

 

Fax: 916-319-2170

 

More Information:

B. Opposition Points to Share with Legislators

AB 2109 is an attack upon parental rights and an attack on religious and personal conscience liberties. It proposes a requirement that, in effect, will burden and restrict the current right of a parent to exempt their child from any or all required vaccinations for school enrollment. The law already allows for non-vaccinated students to be restricted from attending a school while there is an outbreak of particular communicable diseases.

 

Parental rights attacked: AB 2109 forces parents into a paid contractual relationship with a health care provider they might not otherwise utilize for their children’s health care, which is a violation of basic parental rights.

 

AB 2109 forces health care practitioners into a gate-keeping role that creates a hurdle for parents desiring to freely exercise their parental rights to direct the health care of their children.

 

AB 2109 forces parents to attempt to arrange an office visit with a health care provider, hoping they will obtain the required signature of the doctor. There is no requirement that the specified health care providers either make the appointment, charge an affordable rate, or give the parent their signed statement required by this bill.

 

Personal Conscience and Religious freedom attacked: While a visit with and signature from a physician is appropriate for the allowed “medical exemption,” it is not appropriate for the “personal beliefs exemption.” It is not right for the state to put physicians in a role where they can attempt to influence the personal beliefs or the religious beliefs of the parent.

 

Impractical and Unworkable for many parents and therefore selectively discriminatory by its very nature: It may be difficult to find a health care provider who will be willing to do this in California, based on their busy and already overwhelming schedules. Some doctors may decline these appointments simply because they don’t want to give people an excuse to not get vaccinations or don’t want to handle “non-treatment” related issues.

 

AB 2109 ignores the fact that some parents, who have a personal belief that any required vaccination is not appropriate for their child, may not have a regular doctor for their child and family, and from whom they could readily get the required documentation. Many doctor’s offices are not taking new patients. This has already been the experience of parents in Washington where they passed essentially the same law last year.

 

Health care practitioners cannot fully educate a parent regarding the risks and benefits of each required vaccination and the health risks of the related diseases in 20 minutes or less. A study in Pediatrics Magazine showed 80% of parents reported “well” visits lasted less than 20 minutes. One third of parents reported visits of less than 10 minutes.

 

There is no guarantee that, just because you pay money to a provider, you will get a signature. In fact, you probably won’t get one. Doctors will not want to sign these for fear of liability.

 

Creates financial hardship for many families: AB 2109 would impose a burden on families both financially and time-wise. It requires that parents who believe that a particular vaccination or all vaccinations are not in the best interest of their child make and pay for an appointment with an appropriate health care practitioner merely to obtain their signature on a document. This document declares that they provided the required information. This information is available for free on the web or elsewhere.

 

AB 2109 will negatively impact many poor or disabled parents by forcing them to make an unnecessary and maybe difficult trip to the doctor’s office. Many have jobs that do not have the flexibility to take time off merely for an information appointment. Insurance will likely not cover such an appointment; and therefore must be paid by the parent.

 

This requirement is clearly an roadblock for parents being able to get an exemption for their child.

 

Physicians—financial conflict of interest: A parent is forced to pay for information from a health care provider and then hope they can get their required signature. Reports from the state of Washington, which implemented this requirement last year, are that doctors are pressuring parents to join their practice. This is a coercive way of throwing more business toward the classes of health care providers specified in the bill while excluding other sources of the same information.

 

Physicians—philosophical beliefs conflict of interest: Health care practitioners should not have anything to do with a parent’s personal beliefs exemption.

 

AB 2109 gives the physician the power to refuse to give an appointment. Even if he sees the parent, he is not required to sign the statement that is required for the “personal beliefs exemption.”

 

This bill requires parents who are exercising their rights under the law to pay money to be harassed by someone who disagrees with their views.

 

Physician-Patient relationship negatively affected: AB 2109 will likely have a very negative impact on some doctor-patient relationships. This bill requires a health care practitioner to sign a form that acknowledges a child will be exempt from a vaccination. This will be repugnant to some health care practitioners who will not sign the required statement and will result in the development of an unfortunate adversarial relationship between some patients and their doctors. Families will even lose their doctor over this, as has happened under Washington’s similar law implemented last year.

 

C. Background Information

As introduced, AB 2109 requires further documentation to be received by a school regarding a parental personal beliefs waiver (HSC section 120365) for required vaccination. The bill would require a health care practitioner to provide information about the benefits and risks of all required vaccinations and the health risks of specified communicable diseases to the parent, and for the health care provider to sign a public health department form indicating the receipt of that information. The signature will need to be obtained on a separate form provided by the Department of Public Health, which states that the health care practitioner has provided risk and benefit of vaccinations information to the parent. The bill defines health care practitioner to be a physician or surgeon, a nurse practitioner, or a physician assistant, as further specified in the bill by reference to other code sections.

 

This proposed requirement in AB 2109 would apply to all pupils enrolled in a public or private school (including home schools). Currently, a parent may exempt their child from any or all of the required immunizations by one of two ways: (1) a medical waiver (HSC Sec. 120370) by a statement from a physician or (2) a personal beliefs waiver (HSC Sec.120365) by a parent signing a statement on the immunization form that reads:

 

Personal Beliefs Affidavit to be Signed by Parent or Guardian-Immunization

 

I hereby request exemption of the child, named on the front, from the immunization requirements for school/child care entry because all or some immunizations are contrary to my beliefs. I understand that in case of an outbreak of any one of these diseases, the child may be temporarily excluded from attending for his/her protection.

(This waiver for vaccinations is documented by signing the back of the immunization form, pm286b that becomes a part of their school’s pupil records.)

[smartyjones]

edit

Edited April 30, 2012 by smartyjones

[TessaKrista]

California vaccination Bill Ab 2901 (as amended 4/23/12) will be voted on this week! It restricts the vaccine exemption by requiring a doctor signature. Is it ok for me to post a summary of the bill and the representatives contact info for parents to call and voice opposition? Calls need to be made by Tuesday.

 

California was already hit hard with a new law that now allows schools to vaccinate for HPV without parents knowledge or consent, which is why I feel it important for parents to let their representative know that these kind of attacks on vaccine exemptions is not acceptable.

 

Wow! That is so wrong! What is the world coming to? Forced HPV vacines? Some pharmaceutical company must have sponsored big time at some politician's campaign. Why California I wonder?