Police Arrested Twelve Year Old Boy for Refusing Vaccine at School

A child of twelve was charged with ‘threatening behaviour’ at his school in Bowmanville, East of Toronto last week. The arrest happened when the boy (who cannot be named for legal reasons) threw a tantrum refusing the Hepatitis B vaccine. The National Post reported (http://news.nationalpost.com/2010…) that police were brought into Ross Tilley Public School because the boy had threatened to damage the school. Unfortunately, the report failed to give the reason why the child was refusing the vaccine or what made him so angry.

The National Post said:

“Officers consulted with the Crown attorney’s office and charged the boy with threatening, a criminal charge police said was justified: “due to the age of the child and concerns over public safety.”

This may or may not be true; however, at no time did there appear to be any concern for this child’s welfare. There may have been many reasons why the twelve year old did not want to be vaccinated. These range from being afraid of the needle to being worried about the possible side effects.  It could be that Hepatitis B is in fact a disease that is mainly transmitted through sexual intercourse or sharing dirty drug needles!

For the side effects for more information on the Hep B vaccine please read – Drugs.Com,  Side Effects of Hepatitis B vaccine – for the Consumer (http://www.drugs.com/sfx/…)


It appears from the report that it is perfectly OK to give this vaccine to the children at school but it is clearly not an option for any child to refuse to have it. Having the police brought into the school sends out the message to the other children that they must not refuse the vaccine. Clearly this child did not want to have the vaccine and was subsequently treated like a criminal/animal as a result.

But is it perfectly OK to force vaccinate a child if that child refuses the vaccine?

Hospitals and schools are supposed to use a law called the Gillick law to establish whether a child is competent enough to decide whether they want/do not want a medical procedure.

When a parent does not want their child to have a vaccine a child has the right to decide that they want the vaccine and overrule their parents wishes by using the Gillick law. A recent document entitled The Royal College of Nursing Signpost Guide: Nurse-led Immunisation of School Aged Children explains the Gillick law as follows:

“…even if a child is under 16, she or he might be able to give consent to medical treatment providing that they have sufficient understanding of the proposed procedure.” (http://www.rcn.org.uk/…)

However, a child may also refuse medical treatment even if the treatment is life-saving.

Although the Gillick law originally was approved for use in England it is now used worldwide.

The following article explains how this law has been applied  to cases in Canada (http://www.highbeam.com/doc…) or in full here (http://www.allbusiness.com/legal…):

When children refuse medical treatment: role of government and assessments; a standardized test to assess a child’s maturity and understanding would help judges in their Solomonic roles to render more uniform decisions.(Canada)

To determine the law in Canada they use the Medical Consent of Minors Act, R.S.N.B. 1976, c. M-6.I.

CHILDREN, ADOLESCENTS, AND HEALTH CARE – Canadian law and Policy (http://library.athabascau.ca…) by Julie Gilmore explains the act in full. She says: “Treating without consent can give rise to tort, criminal and professional disciplinary liability.”

We have to consider at this point whether arresting the 12 year old was protecting him while respecting his wishes to refuse medical treatment.

Can a 12 year old be mature and competent enough to understand the consequences of not having a vaccine? If he is deemed competent and mature enough to be arrested then one would pressume that he was.

In the UK the Gillick law was used in the case of Hannah Jones. This was a young lady aged 13 who required a life saving heart transplant as a result of treament for leukemia. Hannah felt that she had had enough, she felt tired and wanted to go home and spend the rest of days there. She said: “I am not a normal 13 year old. I am a very deep thinker. I have had to be, with my illness. It’s hard to know I’m going to die, but I also know what is best for me.”

However, the hospital decided that Hannah was too young to make this decision.  Hannah’s parents wanted to honour Hannah’s wishes to stop the treatment and allow their daughter to return home. The hospital used the Gilliack law saying that the girl did not know her own mind and took the case case to court asking for police to be sent in to Hannah’s home and to temporarily remove Hannah from her parents so that the transplant could go ahead. The hospital accused her parents of being ‘bad parents’ for preventing Hannah’s treatment.

Fortunately the court decided to uphold the girls wishes. See the full story (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail…)

The case in the National Post only gave the public a one sided version of the story. It seems neither the boy nor his parents were interviewed. Therefore, reading between the lines, one can only assume that this lad was being forcibly vaccinated. If this was the case, then we should ask ourselves, “Was the correct person arrested in this instance?” If the child was old enough and competent enough to be arrested, then according to the Medical Consent of Minors Act, R.S.N.B. 1976, c. M-6.I., he was well within his rights to refuse this vaccine.

It is stated here (http://www.allbusiness.com/legal) that a doctor may not agree with a patient’s decision to reject medical attention including vaccines, but as long as the child is capable of making that decision, the doctor must respect it. It is clear that the 12 year should have been tested to establish whether he was Gillick competent. If this did not happen then according to the Canadian Act it was the school who broke the law regardless to what this child did or did not threaten. Since when have schools become doctors?

In conclusion, it is clear that the 12 year should have been tested to establish whether he was Gillick competent. If this did not happen, then according to the Canadian Law it was the school officials that the police should have arrested because the school officials violated this young man’s freedom of choice.

  • Portia

    brilliant article.

    Thank you for bringing this to light.

    Legalised child abuse.

  • http://www.catherinejfrompoivch.com Catherine J Frompovich

    Again, we see how a medical inquisition is taking place, as documented in this exceptional article.
    Apparently this journalist understands the intent and logic of law better than the professionals who are entrusted with enforcing it. Does what happened to the twelve-year-old in this story mean that we have lost our rights to our bodies; does the state own us? It certainly would seem so from what transpired in Canada IF
    the young man was force-vaccinated against his better judgement, desire, and will. Sadly, his is not the only case of such medical inquisition-like enforcements being perpetrated upon citizens who either are alllergic to vaccines, have the proper vaccine exemptions in effect, know of the toxic and poisonous adjuvants in vaccines, or just don’t want to be vaccinated, which they have as a God-given right under natural law. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

  • Ashlyn

    The arrest was made for issuing threats, which is a legitimate crime. NOT refusing the vaccine. Get off your soapbox.

  • jax

    Apparently they are only too young to make these deicisions when they say “no”- otherwise authorities are quite happy to let children decide over their parent’s consent in the context of seeking out prescription drugs, birth control and vaccines- as evident by all the legislation being passed allowing children to make these decisions without parental consent- these people are evil plan and simple.

  • Chrono Stryfe

    I know exactly why the boy refused and consequentially lashed out. He like almost every other child nowadays had access to the internet where an older friend of his brought to his attention the REALITY behind vaccines, learning about he made a vow to himself not to let them DESTROY HIS LIFE with their ‘medicine’. Then came time for societal reality to take him, he stood adamant in his decision, to protect himself AT ALL COSTS, of course this meant NOTHING to those vicious adults equally ADAMANT that he be a good little boy. Feeling isolated and powerless and with no other options he lashed out, saying he’d go so far as to destroy the school should they violate him! Whether or not he would actually do this, I can only assume he wouldn’t (he just desperately wanted to assert power and control over his life, where they gave him no room for).

    I know because I WAS THAT CHILD ONCE UPON A TIME. I know because I INFORM CHILDREN just like him of the true dangers in this world. With vaccines, it’s better to be safe than sorry AND NEVER TAKE THEM EVER!

    The rest of this article is bullshit in which I have no response to.

  • Omar Osgood

    Maybe he was just afraid of needles?

  • Tikwan

    @Ashlyn

    Do you have some intimate knowledge about the situation? get off your damn soapbox and open your friggin eyes

  • Marshell X

    Yah, cuz kids just randomly act out. idiot.

  • http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETHEPEOPLE_UNITED/ Marsha

    OMG…When will we be able to escape these dark ages?

  • Sandy

    Thank you for this excellent article. It draws attention to several vaccination issues. There are unanswered questions generally and specifically regarding this very sad case.

    We assume from the article that there was an attempt to force the boy to be vaccinated. There are many of us who believe that vaccination against the will actually borders on torture. It is infrequently a painful procedure where one is subjected to puncturing with a needle and where possibly toxic substances are introduced under pressure through the needle into the body.

    The reasons that the poor young boy resisted the vaccine and in desperation even threatened to do damage may be several. Omar O suggests in a comment the boy’s possible fright concerning needles, a most understandable reason. Chrono S suggests that the boy may well have gathered information about the vaccine which made him determined to refuse it. He may have been better informed than others who accepted the vaccine. In fact, this vaccine is known to cause many extremely serious adverse effects.

    There should surely be extremely strong legal implications before anyone at all is forced against their will to undergo forced vaccination. In my opinion, forced or mandatory vaccination should be pronounced illegal and prohibited. As Catherine F asks – are we losing the rights to our own bodies? Does the state own us?

    Why are schools so actively involved concerning vaccination? They provide facilities and often teaching personnel to organise it. Considering that there is widespread corruption regarding vaccines at all levels, national and international, the question arises as to whether there is payment involved, for example to the school administrations or to the politicians who have introduced the regulations about school participation in vaccination. Schools should surely be for education, not vaccination!

    We understand that the Gillick law implies that one may be assessed regarding maturity – to see if one is able to make an independent choice. Then, provided one is given satisfactory information about the consequences of accepting or refusing a procedure, an independent and informed decision may be made.

    The weak link here is that the consequences of vaccination, certainly long term, are in fact not known. Neither longterm side effects nor for example immunological consequences are known – this lack of knowledge applies to the medical community, health authorties, politicians – everyone, irrespective of their education and competence.

    It is therefore inconceivable that whilst being ignorant about vaccines, many actively promote them.

    There are of course some reasons we are aware of, one being profit and another is the fact that many in the medical profession are brainwashed into believing that vaccines are safe and efficient. Medical literature, journals, research work, medical professionals and even medical faculties are known to be strongly influenced and even financed by the pharmaceutical industry.

    It is interesting to see in the link in the article giving information to nurses http://www.rcn.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/78636/002483.pdf
    this statement: “Immunisation is a safe and highly effective method of preventing disease”.

    Has this statement been accepted without question by nurses? If so, it is disappointing. Are they not interested in independently investigating medical literature from different sources?

    Vaccines’ effect is indeed controversial. There are discussions amongst medical experts about effect because many infectious diseases have disappeared before vaccination programs were introduced. Amongst people who are vaccinated is a large percentage who actually contract the disease which the vaccine was supposed to protect against. “Shedding”, the spreading of the disease by the ones who are vaccinated, is a problem and this counts against the argument that herd immunity is a reason for vaccinating. Children who are not vaccinated are often those with best health.

    The fact that vaccines do indisputably pose risks means that one cannot define them as safe. The word “safe” is therfore extremely misleading and in fact should not be used in connection with vaccines.

    Because there are so many unanswered questions regarding the vaccination issue, all adults and children should be protected against mandatory or forced vaccination.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide
  • Christina England

    Thank you all for your interesting comments.

    I would just like to ask you all a very important question:

    If a child is vaccinated at school using the Gillick law, against their parents wishes and has an adverse reaction, who is then to be held accountable? This is a very large loop hole in the Gilliick law when it comes to vaccinaiton. School’s are very eager to vaccinate our children and even use bribes to get them to agree like shopping vouchers but they are not so keen to pick up the pieces when it goes wrong.

    Christina

  • http://www.Pharm-FreeBabiesandKids.com Judy Converse MPH RD LD

    A vaccine is not a “treatment” for anything. What is the boy’s diagnosis? What is he being “treated” for? Why is he being “treated” at school? Why with no input from a physician? I hope this epic failure of a basic human right to control one’s own body does not cross the US border.

  • http://windsorlive.com JP Comtois

    Well Christina thanks for a great article! To reply to your previous comment first, it would seem that no one would be held accountable because no one would be. There are far too many loopholes as you mentioned and it appears like if an adverse reaction were to occur each party involved could simply point to the next person in the loop. The facts would get cloudy at best and the circle would be infinite as each party utilizes the arguments made by the other parties to shift responsibility. Each party could then claim they were in a catch-22 situation and had no choice but to go along with the program for the common good. But what is really going on, in my opinion, is the only common good being protected seems to be that of the special interest groups, ie. big pharma, medical consultants, doctors, lawyers, researchers, etc.

    fyi: The Ontario Government pays for all Grade 8 Girls to get the HPV vaccine and even though the vaccination is voluntary it strongly encourages it. Let me ask this question if I may and assume I had no idea about the HPV vaccine or this case from Ontario.

    My daughter is in Grade 8 and is faced with the pressure to get the HPV vaccine at school via the local health unit. I have the pamplets that were sent home and have reviewed them but the information is far from adequate to give informed consent, in my opinion. Who, other than her, could possibly give informed consent since I am unaware of any possible adverse effects? Does she have a right to say no to this vaccine based upon her own research, even against my wishes?

    Since the government pays for this vaccine it would seem more than one group would make a profit along the way but at whos expense?

  • Christina England

    Judy

    A vaccine according to the medical encyclopedia and medical online dictionary means:

    “vaccine /vac·cine/ (vak´sēn) a suspension of attenuated or killed microorganisms (viruses, bacteria, or rickettsiae), or of antigenic proteins derived from them, administered for prevention, amelioration, or treatment of infectious diseases “

    http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Recombinant+vaccines

    I totally agree that children not be treated at school. In the UK a school cannot administer drugs for any reason but they can administer vaccines and contraception.

    Totally bizarre I know.

    http://newscdn.bbc.net.uk/1/hi/health/1106112.stm

    I am afraid the Gillick law is now being used worldwide including Australia, Canada, USA, UK

    JP

    I am afraid that yes your daughter can have the HPV vaccine at school without your consent. I suggest that you both research the HPV vaccine together and make an informed choice.

    This morning I received this information from Leslie Carol Botha who is Health Educator, Broadcast Journalist Internationally Recognized Expert on Women’s Hormone Cycles
    Holy Hormones Honey -The Greatest Story Never Told!
    http://holyhormones.com/
    http://sanevax.org

    This is the most up to date information on adverse reaction for the HPV vaccine

    Data is now being updated weekly.
     
    20,575 adverse reactions
    352 reports of abnormal pap smears post vaccination.
    89 reported deaths plus 5 reports submitted to the FDA obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)  are now missing from VAERS
    Case numbers:
    # 300741
    # 314524
    #321405
    # 325151
    # 38130
    The first four reports are on Judicial Watch.

    Vaccine Adverse Effects Report System (VAERS) cumulative deaths report – June 16, 2009

    The other report is in here
    Vaccine Adverse Effects Report System (VAERS) serious effects report from May, 2009 to September, 2010

    Thank you all so much for your comments

    Christina

  • Michelle

    Christina

    I couldn’t help but wonder if this child was already vaccine damaged, on the spectrum and possibly acting out because with that condition, many don’t like be touched let alone with a needle? If he knows (likely from his parents) that it was the vaccine that hurt him to start with, maybe that’s why the “over reaction” in the first place. I sure hope more comes out because if he was dx’d in anyway, how on earth could they use the Gillick law in the first place, eh?

    Thank you for posting more about this subject. I live out in Calgary, and have a non-vaxed three year old. Obviously, I hope to know more so I don’t have this issue later. All the best!

  • Pingback: USWGO Alternative News

  • John

    Great article Christina but i wish you would be more careful with language.
    You should say the boy “declined” to have a vaccination as the word “refused” implies some dishonour on his part or that he is wrong to decline something.
    If i offered you something you don’t like or something which may be harmful to you you would “decline” it rather than “refuse” it for example.
    Non smokers choose not to smoke rather than “refuse” to smoke as another example. Dont fall into the trap of using words that acts as mind memes.

  • Christina England

    Dear John

    Thank you for your comment. I can see that your point makes sense and will take your suggestion on board for future articles. I am very open to constructive criticism .

    Christina

  • http://globalsolutions.org Chump

    Another fine two pronged example of parenting responsibilities.

    1. Parents of this child have not taken the responsibility to teach their own child the importance, the sanctity and sole responsibility to secure one’s own body. A Tantrum? A tantrum means the kid didn’t understand the righteous stance he/she was taking.

    2. Parents of this child have not taken the responsibility to teach their own child at all, and send him/her off to a state-sponsored camp. Worse, the parent’s lack of responsibility encourages the state to use armed enforcers to plunder resource from the dinner table of neighbors with excuses of “education”.

    Despicable. This is the 21st Century, and one would think the old feudal system would have been cast aside- but not in Toronto! Great example of the feudal lord’s ownership of the serfs, the forced labor, and the enslavement of even the young…. in the 21st Century… terrible.

  • John

    Thanks for the feeback Christina. Here in the UK girls have used the gillick law to decline a HPV vaccine even when the parents have signed the consent form. If we have any children who are at risk from this sort of abuse we should instruct them to stay calm and to call mum or dad or the police themselves if they feel any intimidation whatsoever, even fake a sudden illness if thats what it takes to get out of the situation so they call mum or dad to take them home. Or just simply keep them away from school on vaccination days. If any teacher or nurse lays hands on your child to force them to have a vaccine then this is a criminal assault and your child should know their rights that they are not allowed to do this so will be making a complaint to the police.
    I think when they created the gillick law that they did not know its a double edged sword that childen can use to their advantage to decline vaccines and schools taking fingerprints against their wishes.
    My own daughter chose to decline the HPV vaccine and i armed her with this liability form if she suffered from any intimidation or bullying from the school or the Nurse. She did not need it as it happens but it can be handy to focus their attention on the reality of the situation and the law and they will simply refuse to sign it meaning the vaccine cannot take place.
    http://www.childrensfurniture.co.uk/vaccinationliabilityform.pdf

  • John

    Ashlyn wrote
    “The arrest was made for issuing threats, which is a legitimate crime. NOT refusing the vaccine. Get off your soapbox”
    Come of it, the child at worst had a tantrum or a panic attack about the vaccination, are you saying that qualified teachers should call the police very time a child has a tantrum or panic attack in school? they supposed to be trained to cope with thesde things without resorting to the police for goodness sake.
    Can you imagine how often the poice would be called out evertime a child has a tantrum or panic attack in schools?
    I bet you a pound to a penny the police would not have been called if this was about anything else but vaccinations.
    If your not concerned about the abuse of human rights in your country you are just not paying attention.

  • X

    Vaccines should not be given at school. IT SHOULD BE THE PARENTS’ (AND THE CHILD’S [IF THEY ARE OLDER]) EDUCATED DECISION IF THEY ARE TO BE VACCINATED AND THEN THE CHILD SHOULD BE TAKEN TO HIS PHYSICIAN BY HIS PARENTS.

    Government control over our own children has gotten way out of hand.

    Now, if you buck the corrupt system, you are labeled as mentally ill.

  • Jeff in Wisconsin

    CANADA……… What the He?? is wrong with you

  • NicoSF

    I think the officials and the cops are ill minded. We have become a society of criminals and terrorists. It is a 12-year old boy we are talking about. The sick people in the government and media have put so much fear into people’s minds to the point were we terrorize each other. People are so ignorant to reality. Look at what is happening in our societies. Wake the f*** up!! WE ARE THE TERRORISTS!

  • M crouch

    “Having the police brought into the school sends out the message to the other children that they must not refuse the vaccine.” As long as the pig-thugs who held this child down are willing to accept a bullet to the head.

  • Michael

    We don’t know ALL of the details based on the article. However, many questions come to mind:
    1) Was this boy afraid of needles as mentioned previously ?
    2) Has the boy had an allergic reaction to any shot and naturally fearful of this occurring again ?
    3) Did the school have BOTH parents permission before giving him the shot ?
    4) Did / does the boy have nightmares of shots ?
    5) Is the boy afraid to see blood as my 48 year old brother is ?
    6) Did this boy’s siblings / parents have any reactions to shots that he witnessed ?
    7) Did other students have reactions to shots and tell him about this ?
    It sounds very much like this boy reacted as if he was THREATENED FIRST and then responded with his own threat (s) ! I know when I refused a vaccine a few years ago in the ER, my treatment went downhill fast !!!

  • Hansel

    All vaccinated children will develop with age liver cancer

  • God

    The 12 old was simply exercising his RIGHT of free will.
    He didn’t want the shot.
    Case closed.

    The police are stupid as a group.
    They don’t read God’s Laws or recognize citizen’s RIGHTS.
    A 12 year old has RIGHTS to refuse bodily injury.

    Satan lives in all those who, would ignore the RIGHTS of people!

  • http://www.flcv.com/dams.html Bernie Windham

    That vaccinations contain neurotoxic metals such as aluminum and/or mercury and other immunotoxic substances that cause brain inflammation and conditions such as autism and ADHD in those most susceptible is well documented in the medical literature and by tests and treatment clinics. http://www.flcv.com/kidshg.html
    This is also verified by leading neurologists(see URL) Large surveys of parents of autistic children have also confirmed that chelation of toxic metals is the most effective treatment of autism, and that gluten&casein free diets also help many.
    http://www.autism.com/pdf/providers/ParentRatings2009.pdf &
    http://www.generationrescue.org/recovery

  • http://Rense.com Steve Ilievski

    To the principal at this school, you are the principal at this school and as such bear full responsibility for the arrest of this young and courageous boy of 12 who refused to be vaccinated. Unlike you, this boy of 12 showed greater courage and wisdom than you, but then, you were just following orders. Where have we heard that before? With this cowardly and illegal act you managed to impart to this boy and all other students in the school that might is right and conformity is unquestionable. At the G20 protests one of your goons in uniform told a young lady blowing soap bubbles, “If one of those bubbles lands on me I will charge you with assault and arrest you”. But in your school a child of 12 is assaulted with a needle and a vaccine he does not consent to receive, and when your strong arm tactics do not work, you call the cops on this child. What sort of person are you? Do you have children? Would you want someone to treat them the way you treated this pupil? Do you believe in freedom of choice? How about freedom of expression? Are you going to call the cops when one of your colleagues disagrees with you on something? Are you going to call the cops on me for my opinion? Oh yes, you are just following orders How about following a higher order of one’s conscience. Sorry, I wrongly assumed you had one. Schools are places for learning, not places for forced vaccinations and forced fundraising for cancer societies.

  • Christina England

    Thank you Steve for your comments. I agree completely with your sentiments here.

    I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has commented on this article. It has been interesting to read your varied opinions on this controversial subject.

    Christina

  • Rob H

    This young man has should not be forced to do anything against his will!
    Ever wonder why our Public Servants are allowed to violate us, why so called laws like the Gillick law is applied. This is not a law, it is a statue and ACT, that does not apply to a flesh and blood man, it is only applicable to the members of the law society that created it. It only applies to you if you consent to it.
    You mother unknownly gave away your rights when you were born via the birth certifcate.
    Go to http: spritual economics now. net – know your rights!

  • Dave N

    The officials who were forcing this child to be vaccinated and provoked this whole event should be charged with assault.

  • bibi

    Steve Ilievski says:
    December 15, 2010 at 7:01 am
    >>Do you believe in freedom of choice? How about freedom of expression? Are you going to call the cops when one of your colleagues disagrees with you on something? Are you going to call the cops on me for my opinion? Oh yes, you are just following orders How about following a higher order of one’s conscience. Sorry, I wrongly assumed you had one. Schools are places for learning, not places for forced vaccinations and forced fundraising for cancer societies.<<
    As a parent, this is shocking that our kids can be forced to accept a school vaccination. Instead of calling the cops, they should have called the parents. Or are parents nobodys? Without our kids, there would be no school and no need for teachers, unless we wished private teachers.
    Schools are places of supposed to be a place of learning, not prison camps. Hear and obey, no recess, punish the entire class for the misbehaviour of one. For civilized humans we sure behave like cave men.
    My advise for those who still believe in God. Get back to faith and prayers, and live by God's Commandments. I really love the simplicity of God's Laws over man's million and one corrupt ones. Bring back God into our lives and you will see real changes. Change starts within. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you in the way of righteousness.
    Just my humble two cents.

  • Rick

    I am unclear about this whole deal-As far as I know, from personal experience, Hep.B Vaccine is only given as a preventative when exposure to fecal material, blood, dirty needles is expected.Why was this vaccination occuring at all, much less in school?The article didn’t say, & although I think I read every response, no explanation was given.What up with that?

  • Michael

    BOTTOM LINE: ENOUGH is ENOUGH ! The state (government) does NOT have a right to FORCE me or anyone else to comply with their demands as far as health. When the state KIDNAPS children and forces vaccines into them, it ceases to be a government but a Dictatorship ! To those who state this boy was acting out, think about it. Would or Wouldn’t you as a parent want your child to say NO, if you had taught him/her at home to NOT get a shot without his parents permission ? We aren’t talking about whether the kickball should be red or yellow, but it could be life or death if the child has an allergic reaction. Who takes the fall (blame) then ? The words “I’m sorry” by any government employee don’t make up for a child six feet under ! I realize this happened in Canada, but if we in the U.S. don’t wake up enough people to stand up and JUST SAY NO, it will be here under the False Messiah’s so-called Health Care Plan ! WAKE up and WAKE UP those around you !

  • http://www.americansw.blogspot.com Jean Bush

    Christina England has written an article totally devoid of facts. Her first comment regarding Hb is that it MAY be transmitted by; the following, taken from eMedicinehealth.com, is how it is transmitted:

    Hepatitis B Transmission and Causes
    The hepatitis B virus is known as a blood-borne virus because it is transmitted from one person to another via blood or fluids contaminated with blood. Another important route of transmission is from an infected mother to a newborn child, which occurs during or shortly after birth.

    •Direct contract with blood may occur through the use of dirty needles during illicit drug use, inadvertent needle sticks experienced by healthcare workers, or contact with blood through other means. Semen, which contain small amounts of blood, and saliva that is contaminated with blood also carry the virus.

    •The virus may be transmitted when these fluids come in contact with broken skin or a mucous membrane (in the mouth, genital organs, or rectum) of an uninfected person.
    People who are at an increased risk of being infected with the hepatitis B virus include the following:

    •Men or women who have multiple sex partners, especially if they don’t use a condom

    •Men who have sex with men

    •Men or women who have sex with a person infected with hepatitis B virus

    •People with other sexually transmitted diseases

    •People who inject drugs with shared needles

    •People who receive transfusions of blood or blood products

    •People who undergo dialysis for kidney disease

    •Institutionalized mentally handicapped people and their attendants, caregivers, and family members

    •Health care workers who are stuck with needles or other sharp instruments contaminated with infected blood

    •Infants born to infected mothers
    In some cases, the source of transmission is never known.

    You cannot get hepatitis B from the following activities:

    •Having someone sneeze or cough on you

    •Hugging someone

    •Handshaking a persons hand

    •Breastfeeding your child

    •Eating food or drinking water

    •Casual contact (such as an office or social setting)

    I believe the point she is trying to make is that no one, especially a child, should be forced into any vaccination without parental consent. England has not interviewed the parents, child, police or school officials to determine the truth of the incident. It is my opinion that children do not need this vaccine as the mode of transmission is unlikely at that age. England needs to get her facts together before writing.

  • Michael

    Yes, FACTS are very important. But we would NEVER have known about this at all if she had not written her article. I am glad that she wrote her article and SOUNDED the ALARM ! Yes, she can now go back and interview the parents about their son, interview school officials if they will talk – which more than likely they won’t because their hands were caught in the cookie jar so to speak, and interview the Police to determine if a Police response was needed and necessary. All one needs to do is look at the U.S. and see the prison population growing faster than the live-birth rate and see something is wrong.

    Speaking of facts, why are facts so hard to come by when it comes to Vaccines ? Why does Big Pharma hide behind the FDA when it comes to Vaccines and other drugs they produce ? Why does Big Pharma seem to make BILLIONS in profits each year but when someone dies from one of their drugs, they pay penny’s ? Big Pharma and most of the Media and many governments are in the same bed together. Does anyone else smell the rat that I smell ?

  • antoine

    Understand the deal: step by step, everybody is accustomed to be shot with so called vaccines; step by step the dose of mercury and aluminium is rised; it takes years or decades to make everybody ill; the general toll of mortality rocket: Population control done!

  • Gracie

    Health issues are adult issues they should NOT be put at the feet of kids! I’d make a scene too if someone was trying to inject me with something I didn’t want in my body! It fits his age and the fact that he is a KID!

  • Archie1954

    The Ontario police are watching too much American TV. They want to be as out of control as their US counterparts. The Prosecutor should probably be advised to take remedial law classes, you know just to get him up to date on what constitutes an actual offense. At least the kid will have to possibility of a nice juicy lawsuit against the stupid Ontario authorities.

  • http://www.flcv.com/dams.html Bernie Windham

    Hep B is mandated in most places, even though it clearly has more risk than potential benefit for most people.
    The problem is a health system controlled by special interests, with no interest in public welfare, but rather for the
    benefit of special interest and those in the health care system who benefit economically from the huge number of mandated vaccinations, and who benefit from having an unhealthy population to sell their dangerous drugs and services to.

  • Shoobt The Dooby

    this article is misleading. The boy wasn’t arrested for refusing the vaccine. He was arrested for being a little jerk. There’s a difference and in Canada, ANYONE and EVERYONE can REFUSE vaccines as they wish. the school is out of line for pushing it to the point where the kid freaked out and the kid is out of line for being a jerk about it. Just refuse and move on. Done. Idiots!

  • Linda

    I think that parents should make the choice wheather child should be vaccinated or not. When my children Cwere in school I made the decision whether my my child got vaccinated or not , not them or the school. The goverment has no business in deciding what vaccine a should have hepatitis c or hpv.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V2SEXOFDFXK3L2RBZ6VBPD54AU Propecia

    I agree with Linda parents should take the decision because
    it’s their responsibility, they decide what treatment the child will receive.

    Propecia Attorneys
    http://www.propecialawyer.org/