Two very recent stories from two different moms are compelling me to write this article. I'll start with the take-home message. If you take your child to the ER or hospital, for something other than for an adverse reaction to a vaccine, it is important that you know beforehand how you will answer one of the first questions that you will be asked by medical staff, which will be, "Is your child up to date on his/her immunizations?" After hearing these two recent stories, I suggest you consider answering with, "Not relevant. I would like you to treat my child based on his/her symptoms versus on his/her vaccination status (and, of course, based on any other known medical issues and/or family history)."
Now, here is my rationale for that suggestion. The first mom took her son to the hospital presenting with 2 major symptoms of tetanus, which over the course of a couple days escalated to more than 10 symptoms of tetanus. Because this child happens to have an Autism diagnosis, the doctors immediately attributed (i.e. wrote off) his symptoms as resulting from "pediatric delusional behavior due to Autism" which they felt explained his spasming "behavior" (i.e. his spasms were voluntary vs. involuntary and/or medical in origin) which led to his rhabdomyolysis (the destruction of striated muscle cells). Apparently, his Autism "behavior" also caused him to not be able to open his mouth properly or chew his food in order to consume needed calories (i.e. Lockjaw). This is not uncommon for parents who have children with Autism to have their children's symptoms, whatever they may be, written off (and often left untreated) due to their Autism diagnosis. Despite initial, and then additional, symptoms of tetanus, because he'd received his DTaP vaccines, and because his blood tests showed titers to tetanus, they refused to consider tetanus, treat for tetanus, document that he had tetanus, or report a suspected case of tetanus to the CDC...ignoring requests from his highly-educated and intelligent mother to please do a proper and reliable assessment for tetanus (a costly test which I think involves injecting the patient's blood serum into a mouse to see if it develops tetanus...not positive about the details of this diagnostic test).
First, having been vaccinated against tetanus does not at all mean that one won't get tetanus...there are many reported cases of tetanus in the vaccinated, i.e. vaccine failure is a reality. Furthermore, vaccine failure and waning "immunity" are the rationale for the many booster shots for the DTaP vaccine, because it is known that it doesn't always "take" and that it wears off (if you even believe that it offered any protection in the first place). Secondly, having titers for tetanus in one's blood does not mean that one is immune to tetanus and therefore won't contract it, not at all. There are many cases of people with high titers for a certain disease who then contract the disease, and, there are also many cases of those with no titers for a certain disease who do not contract the disease even when exposed. Despite these known facts, and quite unbelievably, titer levels post-vaccination are how vaccine efficacy is determined! This mother believes, and rightly so, that the doctors and the hospital do not want to believe/admit that the vaccine for tetanus doesn't work (they don't want to admit to the reality of vaccine failure), they don't want to believe/admit that one who has blood titers for a certain disease can still contract it, and they don't feel legally or morally obligated to properly test for or report this boy's probable case of tetanus to the proper authorities (i.e. to the CDC, which also doesn't want to admit to vaccine failures). The system now in place has been purposefully and shamefully designed to deny and hide vaccine failures (in addition to vaccine injuries and deaths) and to not admit them to the public.
The second case involved a mom going by ambulance with her toddler-aged son to the ER due to suspected croup which was severely affecting the boy's ability to breathe. Upon arriving at the ER, she was asked if he was up to date on his immunizations. When the doctor learned that he had received no vaccinations to date, he said that he would then need to treat her son differently than he would treat a vaccinated child...i.e. her son would need to be tested for epiglottitis with both a chest and a neck x-ray, which apparently he would not do if her son was vaccinated. When the mom asked if they could first try the breathing treatment to see if it worked, then the x-rays if it didn't, he said no and insisted that both be done. To be clear, epiglottitis can be very serious, and should not be taken lightly. However, both vaccinated and unvaccinated children can contract epiglottitis. Just because a child has been vaccinated (with the Hib vaccine) does not at all mean that the child cannot contract this disease. In reality, I don't see why a doctor would treat a vaccinated child versus an unvaccinated child any differently if he truly suspected epiglottitis. When the mom challenged him later regarding this, and asked him if epiglottitis only occurred in unvaccinated children, he answered, "Yes." NOT TRUE! If one does even a cursory look into this disease, one finds that it can result from many sources (many of which don't have an associated vaccine). Additionally, we know that each and every vaccine has an admitted percentage rate of failure. How ignorant and arrogant the behavior of this doctor was, and I would argue, how dangerous. He is making treatment decisions based on vaccination status versus the patient's presenting symptoms (as was the doctor in the story above). He is assuming that vaccines are 100% effective, and that the vaccinated won't contract certain illnesses. He is assuming that unvaccinated children are more susceptible to diseases, when in fact, the very opposite may be true due to their superior immune systems and often-superior health.
After the doctor lectured this mom with his scientifically-unfounded opinions about the dangers of not vaccinating her son, he then proceeded to threaten/bully her by saying he would then need to keep her son for a few more hours because he wasn't vaccinated (this was after her son had responded successfully to the breathing treatments and was back to breathing normally, and after the x-ray results were back). He told her that she "would need to feel the consequences of choosing not to immunize" by being made to stay longer! She then asked him if he was going to hold her hostage because she didn't vaccinate (you go, Girl!). He responded that he wasn't holding her hostage, that he was just concerned about her unvaccinated son. She waited one more hour to make sure her son's breathing remained steady, then left the hospital, without seeing this ignorant, arrogant doctor again. Let's hope and pray he doesn't call CPS for "neglectful parenting" as seems to be a developing trend with regards to parents who choose (legally choose, I might add) to not vaccinate their children. Below is an excerpt from an email I sent her:
Although you need to tread carefully with such ignorant and arrogant doctors (because it is becoming increasingly common to report non-vaccinating parents to CPS), you can always remind medical staff that vaccines are 100% elective medicine in the state of CA, meaning you can take them or leave them, as you, THE PARENT, sees fit. Vaccines have just as many (and in my opinion, far more) dangers as the diseases for which they're targeted, and as I mentioned, they are often ineffective (and their effectiveness is lied about, as the current Merck Whistleblowers case shows, where 2 former employees of Merck are suing Merck for lying about the efficacy of the mumps portion of the MMR vaccine).
In this second story, another option (especially when your child is having trouble breathing!) is to respond to the question "Is your child up to date with his/her immunizations?" by truthfully answering "Yes, he/she is" even if your child is not vaccinated at all, or is partially-vaccinated. How is this truthful? The immune system is working 24/7/365, constantly developing and refining itself in response to its environment and in an attempt to keep the body healthy. Thus, it is indeed up to date, as in up to the second! (Your answer could be challenged by hospital staff if they have immediate access to your child's medical records which might include your child's vaccination status, but from recent stories that I have heard, and from personal experience, once a parent answers the immunization question, the medical staff proceeds with their next question). Most important, of course, is getting the needed treatment for your child in a timely fashion, so say/do what is needed to accomplish that. If you need to be "creative" in any way in today's tyrannical world, by all means, be creative! It is your child, even if the nurses, doctors, hospitals, and state seem to have forgotten that very important fact.
In summary, disclosing that the child had been vaccinated negatively impacted the treatment of the first child (and the proper testing for and reporting of possible tetanus), and with regards to the second child, disclosing that the child had not been vaccinated negatively impacted the treatment he received. In either case, the child's vaccine status was not relevant to initiating timely and appropriate treatment and should not have impacted his treatment at all! Treatment in both cases should have been based on presenting symptoms (and anything else pertinent, as mentioned at the beginning), not on vaccination status.
I hope sharing these 2 mothers' recent stories with you will help you prepare for any ER/hospital visit you might need to make with your children. Reminder that if Urgent Care is an option, it might be a slightly safer bet with regards to not being reported to CPS by medical staff for not vaccinating. Scary times in which we are living. Hoping that you won't have any need for either the ER or the hospital.
Laura Hayes is the mother of vaccine-injured children, one of whom was diagnosed with "Autism" at age two as a result of his "routine" childhood vaccinations. It is her hope that by working to educate others about the dangers and inefficacies of vaccines people will begin to demand that vaccine mandates be banned in each and every state. Additionally, she hopes to see the 1986 NCVIA repealed soon and liability for vaccine injuries and deaths returned to its rightful owners, those who manufacture and administer vaccines. She believes that if those two things were to occur, the health, development, and well-being of our children would drastically improve.