Medical Tyranny & Big Government: Judge orders FORCED VACCINATIONS for children in shocking UK court case

Image: Judge orders FORCED VACCINATIONS for children in shocking UK court case
Vicki Batts
April 13, 2017

Freedom has taken another crushing blow in the UK as a High Court judge ruled that a mother can’t do what she believes is best for her children — but only because her beliefs don’t go along with their preordained narrative of what defines a child’s “best interests.”

The mother in question did not want to vaccinate her children in part, because they are vegans and current vaccine development methods do not align with the family’s personal beliefs (they contain animal blood components and DNA). The mother also cited concerns about toxic ingredients often found in vaccines, such as aluminum salts, as part of why she opposed getting her children vaccinated. According to the mother, her oldest son had already experienced side effects from previous shots such as “cradle cap, a persistent cough and eczema.”

However, this story is not just a case of courts versus a loving mother. The children’s father brought the mother to court over her refusal to vaccinate the kids, and applied for a court order to force vaccination upon them. The father says that he did this out of concern for his sons’ safety, and claims that the mother is “obsessive, overprotective and narrow in her views.”

But who is really being narrow-minded here? In the wake of evidence that vaccines can cause a number of health issues, including neurodevelopmental disorders, is it really so “narrow” to question their safety? One might wonder if refusing to acknowledge “dissenting” information on the topic of vaccines — and at least take it with a grain of salt — is what is truly narrow.

The father went on to say that the mom had a “suspicion of all conventional medicine,” and illustrated this claim by describing how in the past, she had refused to give her sons paracetamol-based medicines. Paracetamol is the British term for what we in the states call “acetaminophen.”  However, these concerns are not unfounded: Acetaminophen has been shown to sometimes cause liver damage, even when consumed in the recommended amounts as instructed by the label. In 2013, it was estimated that some 80,000 people a year are hospitalized due to acetaminophen poisoning and another 500 or so would die from liver complications. So, how is this not a valid concern?

The boys’ mother defended her beliefs in court and stated, “It is not natural to be injected with metal elements and as a vegan, it goes against my beliefs for my children to be injected with something that is grown on animal cells or something that has been tested on animals.”

She also stated, “What I have learned is that yes, vaccines do work some of the time, but there is a definite risk with vaccination. The vaccine manufacturers have cited that vaccines are ‘unavoidably unsafe.’” The UK mom, who has not been named to protect the anonymity of the kids, went on to describe how her boys are very healthy children and that their risk of disease is low because they have strong immune systems that help to protect them against illness.

Sadly, but yet unsurprisingly, the father’s attempts at making the mother sound “paranoid,” prevailed. The High Court Judge Mark Rogers cited the UK’s Children’s Act of 1989, which allows the court to “overrule a parent” for the sake of the child’s “welfare.” Natural Blaze reports that vaccines do not appear in any of the headlines for the legislation, though that made little difference in the outcome.

Rogers noted that the mother was unable to find a doctor to support her views that was willing to appear in front of the courts on her behalf. To do so, naturally, would have been career suicide for any doctor — or at the very least, it would have opened them up to quite a bit of scrutiny. He even went on to say that he was “sorry” that the mother would view his ruling as being “wrong,” and questioned her ability to view the matter “objectively.”

Forced vaccination will never be the right course of action. Vaccines do come with risks, regardless of whether or not mainstream medicine puppets are willing to recognize it — facts are facts. Vaccines are not only made with animal-derived ingredients, but they are often tested on animals. To make matters worse, many vaccines contain toxic adjuvants such as aluminum salts, which are known to cause a wide range of deleterious effects.

This issue will not be going away anytime soon, and as more people wake up to the dangers of vaccines, we will likely begin to see more court-mandated vaccination cases.

Read More At:


Ohio Legislature moves towards mandatory vaccines, proposing to eliminate philosophical exemptions entirely

Mandatory vaccines

L.J. Devon
July 22, 2016

A growing number of parents across the nation are now going against the recommendations of the CDC vaccine schedule – which currently promotes the injecting of 49 doses of various vaccines before a child turns 6 years old. The number of parents opting out of the onslaught of childhood vaccinations has doubled since 2009. As vaccine use plummets, state legislatures are trying to find new ways to bully parents into the vaccination cycle.

A new bill in Ohio (HB 564) seeks to intimidate parents into vaccine compliance by forcing them to be re-educated about the benefits of vaccines. Ohio parents will no longer be allowed to send their children to public schools unless they see a state-licensed medical doctor first to receive such re-education. If the parent objects to a vaccine, and determines it’s not worth the risk to their child, they will no longer get to make that choice freely. This law will put parents under the control of the medical system by denying any philosophical exemption the parent may have.

Since vaccines are a medical procedure, informed consent should always be required. However, if this law were to pass, the government could make extremely risky medical decisions without parental consent. HB 564 allows school administrators to vaccinate children without parental consent, if officials deem it necessary.

The state is claiming ownership of children’s bodies, trampling on the natural rights and convictions of parents

If Ohio parents object to a vaccine, they will be required by law to report to and get permission from a state-licensed medical doctor. The doctor is then required by the state to bully the parents with pro-pharmaceutical propaganda that makes vaccines look like perfect medical science. If the parents still object to the vaccine after the doctor has tried to forcibly brainwash them, they can then try to obtain a “religious exemption.” At this stage, many parents will just go along to get along because it’s easier to comply than argue with a doctor or be investigated, harassed, and/or profiled.

Under the pressure of this new medical system dictate, it will be easier for parents to just let go of their natural born rights and throw away their own education, experiences and convictions on vaccines. If parents continue to object, doctors will easily feel threatened and may attempt to call in the CPS to kidnap the child and put them into state custody. This is a growing problem around the country.

At the end of day, parents won’t be able to obtain a “religious exemption” to the vaccines unless the medical doctor and the state give them permission. In this way, parents are being turned into slaves of the state, and essentially slaves of the pharmaceutical companies which ultimately control the science, the law and the minds of medical professionals.

Most disturbingly, the state is essentially claiming ownership over children’s bodies. If parents want to use the public school education system (most parents have no choice), they must sign their sovereign, parental rights away to the state, subjecting their children to being pincushions for endless vaccine and pharmaceutical experiments.

Parents don’t need permission to raise healthy and independent children

Why should parents be forced to vaccinate their children endlessly for benign illnesses that the body can build natural, lifelong immunity to?

Why should parents be forced to retrain their child’s entire immune system (weakening natural first line defenses) with ongoing shots?

Why should parents fear diseases that have statistically been overcome in communities with proper hygiene, sanitation and nutrition?

How many micrograms of aluminum are in those 49 vaccine doses, and how do they affect children’s neurological development?

These questions (and many more concerns of parents) will not be answered, or in fact entertained at all in Ohio, because the medical system may soon have the authority of the law to ram pro-vaccine propaganda down parents’ throats, intimidating them into vaccine compliance, barring their children from public school attendance, or vaccinating them against a parent’s will.

Vaccines (singularly or in compounding doses) can damage children subtly or dramatically for life. More people are recognizing this and saying NO. No parent needs permission or an exemption to make a medical decision for their own body or for the bodies of their children.

Read More At:

Authorities Plan Strategic Attack of Anti-Vaccine “Myths”

Source: TheDailyBell
March 31, 2016

One promising new approach is to keep track of the vaccine myths circulating in cyberspace and rebut each one as it appears. This requires tracking information from search engines and following anti-vaccination websites and parents’ forums. – Economist

The battle against anti-vaccine websites and individuals is about to intensify.

Rather than fighting on just a PR front, authorities are now planning a strategic offensive against anti-vaccine “myths” as they appear. The idea is to combat these supposed myths one by one in a concerted fashion.

According to the Economist article:

Many [parents] were shaken by a claim, later debunked, that there was a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, which protects against measles, mumps and rubella.

The only problem is. The Economist is wrong. The linkage between MMR and autism has not been debunked.

In fact, the MMR-autism debate has been reinfoced by the recent film Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe.

Though the presentation of the film at the Tribeca Film Festival was cancelled after severe pressure from the pharmaceutical industry, this did nothing to deprive it of a premiere.

It is now scheduled for release tomorrow at New York’s Angelika Film Center, and will then receive a wider release in other cities.

The film revolves around accusations that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention refused to release information about links between autism and the MMR vaccine.

A  former center employee, William Thompson, has claimed that studies seeming to confirm the link were purposefully destroyed or altered.

The director and co-writer of “Vaxxed” is Andrew Wakefield, who produced a study in 1998 that suggested the possibility of a link between autism and vaccinations. It was first published in a medical journal, Lancet, and then retracted in 2010.

Though Wakefield’s medical license was revoked in Britain, as the anti-vaccination movement has grown, so has his stature.

We interviewed Dr. Wakefield on this in 2010.

The continued debunking of vaccines is perhaps the starkest example of how the Internet is upending mainstream media shibboleths.

Despite the unequivocal stances of health organizations like the CDC that “vaccines do not cause autism,” the anti-vaccine movement has expanded rapidly in large part because of social media and websites.

The government has responded in typical fashion, with force.

New laws in some countries now force parents to vaccinate their children. However, as the Economist notes, “Strict rules may even harden anti-vaccination attitudes.”

More important, say public-health experts, is to boost confidence in the safety of vaccines and trust in the authorities that recommend them—both badly damaged in many European countries by past public-health mis-steps, such as a scandal with contaminated blood supply in France from the late 1990s.

Continue Reading At: