Legislative Victory For Parental Rights in Maryland As Politicians Now Take The Offensive
Updated
The fight is on as big government attempts to force a wedge between children and their parents.
Maryland is the site of the latest update in the American battle against the legislative government intrusion into the parent-child relationship.
Senate Bill 378 (SB 378) gave “…minors who are at least 14 years old have the same capacity as an adult to consent to vaccination; authorizing minors under the age of 14 years to consent to vaccination under certain circumstances”
This would include children with developmental disabilities.
On February 17, the bill’s author Maryland Senator Cheryl C. Kagan withdrew the bill. The reasoning given for withdrawal was even more absurd than the bill’s language itself.
“We just haven’t had the time or staff to fine-tune some aspects of the bill.”
Whatever that means….
As state groups activate to take on legislation from all angles, Informed Choice Maryland provided considerable pressure on the bill over the previous week. They also let it be known that they were prepared to bring in expert testimony at the upcoming hearing on Wednesday, February 22nd.
The victory was supercharged as elected officials in Maryland then went on the offensive. Senator Justin Ready introduced SB0566 which states the antithesis of the now defunct SB 378:
“…a parent has the fundamental right to direct the upbringing, education, care, and welfare of the parent’s child; prohibiting the State or a political subdivision from infringing on a parent’s fundamental right to direct the upbringing, education, care, and welfare of the parent’s child unless the State or political subdivision can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence certain factors; and providing the Act may not be construed to authorize a parent to cause physical or emotional harm to the parent’s child.”
Since around 2015, heated debate spilled out into politics and legislation on whether or not parents should vaccinate their kids. That debate quickly devolved into whether parents should be removed from the picture entirely when it comes to vaccine decisions. The health community and government representatives are now deeming parents and the need for parental consent ‘a barrier to obtaining vaccination.’
Washington D.C.’s B23-0171 (later named D.C. Law 23-193) was active in 2019 and sought to add a new section into the existing regulations that would allow a minor child of any age, to consent to receive a vaccine. The bill, and its hearing, signaled a new high-water mark towards removing parents from some of their children’s most important medical decisions.
During the public hearing in June 2019 to discuss the act before it was signed into law, pediatrician Dr. Helene Felman, representing Washington D.C.’s chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), stated:
“As a pediatrician, I like the legislation as it stands because it offers the opportunity to capture those young adults who can make informed decisions at technically any age.”
Several other proponents of the bill who testified similarly danced around committing to an age they believed would be appropriate for a child to make their own medical decisions – ultimately 11 was decided upon.
No age limit is what is really being sought after. And this should concern everyone.
Fortunately, a legal victory funded by the Informed Consent Action Network halted D.C.’s overreach, a D.C. district judge issued a preliminary injunction against the act in favor of parents who brought suit. The parents filed complaints and were able to demonstrate that the act likely violates federal law.
Medical institutions that should be preserving parental rights, true informed consent, and strengthening families and communities appear to be no longer doing so.
The American Medical Association (AMA) has thrown its full weight behind attempting to remove the parents from medical decisions involving their children.
At a policy meeting in 2019, the AMA announced it “will encourage state legislatures to establish comprehensive vaccine and minor consent policies.” The press release continues by stating the AMA “will support state policies allowing minors to override their parent’s refusal for vaccinations.”
The now failed D.C. and Maryland laws are far from one-off situations. There is a concerted push from multiple angles attempting to normalize the idea of eliminating parents from several medical decisions.
With the CDC adding the mRNA Covid shot, the idea of using legislation to remove the parent in an attempt to further ram this experimental shot, which people overwhelmingly no longer want, into the arms of unaccompanied minors is criminal.
States and their people are activating like at no other time in recent history. Where once bills like these could be brought to the floor with a straight face, they now are cause for embarrassment and retreat when faced down by educated communities and expert testimony.
Expanding well beyond the vaccine conversation, why do so many doctors, teachers, and psychiatrists want access to children with parents out of the way?
Moving into the 2024 presidential election, the topics of mandated medicine, parental rights, and the harms caused by the operating system of the medical-industrial complex will become front and center.
Which side will you be on?