Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

We all wouldn't be were we are without a stable social structure.

The structure is necessary to find the right people who are then able to change the world.

You know the poor kid who got fed and support from school etc despite it's upbringing which then studies and finds a cancer treatment.

But hey who cares right? I mean look at everything you actually own in your flat or house: non of it comes from your family and you clearly find it totally fine that other people are working for you and you probably despite that they also want to have a good live because this is also social and happens through gov and not through the free market.

Gov is the opposition to pure capitalism and gov is us the people.

I don't think anyone of any significance said the virus doesn't exist - just that it doesn't pose anything like the level of danger that the hysteria would suggest, which is correct.

It wasn't to enslave mankind as such, but there were certainly governmental factions looking to parley the situation to introduce climate change lock downs (see the Oxford 15 minute city project), universal id cards (vax pass mandates), and to address exploding government debt through inflation, impoverishing the citizenry.

Right wing people also correctly recognised that progressives despise them, and were more than happy to dominate them through spiteful imposition of malicious rules upon them and their children.

>I don't think anyone of any significance said the virus doesn't exist

How about someone with a dedicated audience of 15 million mostly older folks, and the recipient of the highest civilian honor in the US, on his highly popular radio show?

>Rush Limbaugh: Folks, this coronavirus thing, I want to try to put this in perspective for you. It looks like the coronavirus is being weaponized as yet another element to bring down Donald Trump. Now, I want to tell you the truth about the coronavirus. (interruption) You think I’m wrong about this? You think I’m missing it by saying that’s… (interruption) Yeah, I’m dead right on this. The coronavirus is the common cold, folks.

I suggest you look into laws surrounding medical neglect of children. The first part of my comment was general, and is specifically describing this very type of parent, but not taken to an extreme. As far as my state laws go "A parent who denies their child vital and necessary medical treatment faces the following consequences:

• Loss of custody. The child is taken to state custody for protection if the parent is found of negligence.

• Criminal charges. The parent may be charged with child abuse and neglect or even assault if it is proven that he or she has failed in providing the necessary medical attention for the child."

The state take will authority of both situations. I am not sure what the laws are regarding this where you are. HN is a globally accessible website, but discussions are generally US-centric. It wasn't outside the context, I was just not focusing on the very extremes. After you've interacted with this type of parent once or twice, it becomes very easy to identy harmful behavior. I do mean interact with parents that ended up losing custody over neglect. I hope you empathize more with the children stuck in these situations after reading some of the cases. I am not 100% sure what you are attempting to argue.

In my state becoming aware of such behavior and failing to report itself is a crime. I think the crime part only officially applied during when I was associated as an employee of a univeristy and teaching high schoolers. I know I had to do mandated reporter training. The law states every single state resident is a mandated reporter, but I am not sure about the consequences for residents.

The reason vaccination is not covered under this law is because there is it's hard to prove the harm of denying vaccines, in a legal way. There are plenty of people, especially healthcare professionals, that wish vaccination was covered under this kind of law. It is true in some states but not all.

"Results. Our search yielded 9 cases from 5 states. Most courts (7 of 9) considered vaccine refusal to constitute neglect. In the 4 cases decided in jurisdictions that permitted religious exemptions, courts either found that vaccine refusal did not constitute neglect or considered it neglect only in the absence of a sincere religious objection to vaccination.

Conclusions. Some states have a legal precedent for considering parental vaccine refusal as medical neglect, but this is based on a small number of cases. Each state should clarify whether, under its laws, vaccine refusal constitutes medical neglect."

https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/is-denying-medical-treatme...

https://reportingchildabusenj.org/#:~:text=All%20residents%2....

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5308147/

I'm familiar with those laws. The problem is that those laws can be invoked in ways that harm the child, just as easily as they can be invoked to prevent harm. You both are focusing on situations where the parent is abusive. I'm looking at situations where the parents are genuinely caring for the child, and the state invokes those laws to the detriment of the child.

I mean, it's too bad that the Ninth Circuit had to specify that "a social worker and a police officer are not entitled to qualified immunity for investigating a report of a child crying by making a nonconsensual entry into a home without a search warrant or special exigency and coercing a parent to aid them in strip-searching her child." [0]

As I pointed out earlier - what happens when the parent is well-educated, and knows better than to allow some treatment for the child, but the state decides otherwise and forces something that harms the child? This is the risk which we run when we allow the state to have final say.

Edit: archive link instead of original dead link.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20100706002834/http://www.family...