Oregon bill 254 was brought to my attention last month. The bill cannot be other than an attack on the people and extreme violation of natural human rights, bioethics, and international law. Furthermore, I am astonished that this bill comes in a time where we are witnessing, more than ever before, how issues like vaccine and public health can be highly politicized and influenced by big pharma. For more clarification, the following points are the premises for the above conclusion:
“Removes ability of parent to decline required immunizations against restrictable diseases on behalf of child for reason other than child’s indicated medical diagnosis. Prohibits child from attending in person specified school-related events, meetings and opportunities. Allows Oregon Health Authority to recommend diseases in addition to restrictable diseases against which children may be immunized.”
- This proposition seeks to violate natural human rights by removing the parents’ right from choosing what best benefits their child. The responsibility of bringing a child and providing the best care is without a doubt exclusive for parents. Governments cannot violate this human right. This right is clearly stated in article 18 of the UNICEF convention of 1989 which was ratified by UN state members. And in the history of the US Supreme Court rulings, i.e, Meyer v. Nebraska, ((262 U.S. 390 (1923)), the Court held that a statute forbidding the teaching of the German language impermissibly encroached on the liberty parents possess. The Court explained that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects this liberty, incorporating “the right to marry, establish a home, and bring up children.”;
- It violates the ‘informed consent’ that is legally required for receiving any medical intervention. Children, indisputably, are unable to meet this requirement and, by law and natural human rights, this right is reserved to the parent. The government’s entities, employees, and others are not parents, therefore cannot fulfill the required ‘consent’;
- Accordingly, it violates article 6 section 1 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights that reads :
“Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.”;
- Moreover, this bill not only allows for discrimination against those who choose different health options for their children but also makes it illegal to have a different health approach than that adopted by authorities. This is again a violation of human rights;
- furthermore, the allowed prejudice against those who choose different health approaches in this bill not only legalizes violating children’s sovereign body but also legalizes violating the child right to attend school to receive actual education despite having laws already in the book that require sick children to stay home during their transmissivity period;
- the proposal of this bill, also, lacks the scientific justification. As immuned children will not be affected by the unimmunized child. That is, immunized children are supposedly immune to what they were vaccinated against therefore the perceived fear of being infected from those who do not favor vaccination is not applicable to those who favor this medical intervention.
Additionally, the history of corruption and the great influence of big pharma must be a considerable factor in dismissing such insulting mandated medical intervention. For instance, vaccine manufacturers managed to influence Congress in 1996 to get legal immunity from liability. Consequently, the U.S. Federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has awarded approximately 4.5 billion dollars to vaccine victims. And the true numbers of injuries are undoubtedly much higher. A study titled Electronic Support for Public Health-Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System concluded “Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).”
The issue of health and well-being is concerning for every human being regardless of the law. The government’s role must be confined to providing the means to achieve a healthy life, leaving the choice to the citizens; for it is their right to choose what can be best for them.
 Health Resources & Services Administration. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Data Report, January 1, 2021. https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/data/index.html
 Lazarus, Ross et al. Electronic Support for Public Health-Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 2007-2010. https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf