Four parents have filed suit against the District of Columbia over a new law that allows minors 11 years and older to be vaccinated without their parents’ consent or knowledge.
The new municipal regulation, the Minor Consent to Vaccination Act of 2020, was passed last November and allows children as young as 11-years-old to consent to vaccinations so long as they are deemed “capable of meeting the informed consent standard” and “able to comprehend … significant risks ordinarily inherent in the medical care.”
The law went into effect this past March.
In addition to allowing children to consent to vaccinations against the wishes or knowledge of their parents, the law also allows the vaccination providers to bill the insurance companies for their services and demands that the providers hide the immunization from the parents.
From the law:
Providers who administer immunizations under the authority of this subsection shall seek reimbursement, without parental consent, directly from the insurer, which may be Medicaid, Alliance, or private insurance. The provider shall notify the insurer that the immunization has been provided under the authority of this section.
Also:
Insurers shall not send an Explanation of Benefits for services provided under the authority of this subsection.
“The [law] is reckless, unconstitutional, and needlessly endangers children’s lives by stripping away parental protection and the protection of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986,” said Mary Holland, the president and general counsel of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), which along the Parental Rights Foundation is representing the parents suing Washington, D.C.
The bill’s sponsor, Council member Mary Cheh, outlined her reasons for the bill at a council meeting in October: “Unfortunately, we see a rising number of individuals or families across the globe, really, who are choosing not to vaccinate their children based on the widely disproven belief that vaccines may cause autism or other harmful health effects. These anti-science beliefs not only put the unvaccinated children at risk, but have led to the spread of diseases that have been all but eradicated in the past.”
Cheh added, “Given our current, ongoing pandemic, and the incredible work being done to develop a COVID-19 vaccine, it’s more important than ever, I think, that we reduce any and all barriers to these treatments, and this legislation aims to do just that, by increasing access to vaccines to minors who choose to get vaccinated, but have been unable to do so.”
Unfortunately, it “reduces those barriers” to children receiving vaccinations by completely cutting the parents out of the process and usurping parental rights over their children’s healthcare.
“The D.C. Act is an unconscionable intrusion on the rights and liberty of parents and children,” Holland said. “As the Supreme Court held, ‘The liberty interest at issue in this case—the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children—is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court.’” (Troxel v. Granville)
It’s not the first time (and probably not the last time) that the District of Columbia and Mayor Muriel Bowser have been sued over the legislation. Joshua Mazer sued the D.C. Department of Health after his daughter J.D. — a resident of a different state — went to Washington in order to receive a vaccine so that she could go to summer camp without her parents knowing about the vaccine.
Mazer was reluctant to have his daughter vaccinated due to religious beliefs and because she had an adverse reaction to a vaccine in the past. When told she needed more vaccines, J.D. hesitated and did not receive the vaccination but, allegedly, a health care professional told her how to get the vaccines without her parents knowing if she changed her mind.
“Plaintiff is extremely concerned that a doctor in the District of Columbia. sought to vaccinate his daughter J.D. without his knowledge or consent, and was prepared to engage in an elaborate subterfuge, including counseling his daughter on how to lie, in order to conceal that any vaccines were given,” the Mazer lawsuit explained.
Deceit is at the very core of this District of Columbia law. Included in the law is the provision that insurance companies must essentially lie to parents and not send any explanation of benefits should their child be vaccinated. When a law not only encourages lying but, in fact, codifies it, there’s something terribly wrong with that law — and anyone who voted for it.
