"W.Va. mom asks immunization exemption for daughter"

I can tell you, our school system would fight having this child admitted; and in the meantime (while the courts decide), the child WOULD NOT be in the public schools. Happens all the time, at the beginning of the year, till the parents get the kids their shots; and with good reason, too.

<snip>






http://www.dailymail.com/News/statenews/200905130531

If she wrings her hands over that, then get the kid the shots.

The law is clear. Only kids who are vaccinated against communicable disease are allowed in public school.

The schools are not responsible for her screwball prejudice.

no one is preventing her from either: following the dictates of her religious beliefs, in which case their are consequences; or following the law, in which case her child is free to attend the public school.

If she does not wish her child to meet the qualifications for public school, then she is perfectly free to make that choice - the consequence is that her child's education is now her job. (Poor child!). If she wants to use the public schools, she has a responsibility not to endanger other children with HER religious beliefs.

It's really quite simple. I just hope that's how the court finds!

Sounds more like batshitcostal to me.

I thought autism was something you were born with, not something you develop later. Regardless, this whole "vaccinations causes autism" thing has been thouroughly discredited. This lady needs to go away and take her fail with her.

in the law. They may have been eliminated by now.

Scroll down to find your state.

http://www.vaclib.org/exemption.htm

Warning: that is one scary web site.

scary (and stupid)!:scared: :evilfrown:

Its one thing to have personal relgious beliefs. Its another thing when those beliefs infringe/endanger others..like the kids that for health reasons can't have immunizations...these people put other people's health at risk. Oh plus it's been noted that many of these "religious" exemptions are for people who never professed any religion in the past. Odd that.:grr:

Ugh, I hate these idiots!

she attempted to use WV's medical exemption for the younger daughter and was denied, and that she then decided to claim a First Amendment privilege in Federal Court, rather than attempt to pursue the medical exemption issue in State Court. The briefs might be interesting: one question might be whether the religious claim were bona fide, since there was no such issue concerning vaccination of the older daughter, and the religion claimed seems unusual

One natural reaction might be that the woman is simply terrified on behalf of her younger daughter -- and is seeking some way to "protect" the girl while enabling her live a "normal" life with other kids. One might sympathize with her concern, even if it is not well-founded

Of course, she is probably wrong that her older daughter's problems were caused by vaccination, since current medical consensus seems to run against a vaccine-autism link -- but of course if autism had multiple and varied causes, a familial susceptibility to some vaccine-induced reaction causing autism (if such a susceptibility existed) wouldn't necessarily show up in any coarse-grained epidemiological study

When most kids are vaccinated, a few unvaccinated kids aren't really a general threat, and being surrounded by immunized kids, the unimmunized aren't at terrible risk. A generalized anti-vaccine philosophy probably does rise to the level of child abuse if the child has a puncture wound or a batbite and the parent refuses a tetanus shot or a rabies series

She would ague that an unborn child is a human with rights, yet now the child is "hers" and she gets to make the decisions regarding its healthcare. Hypocrite!