Los Desaparecidos Industriales: Privatization and the Use of Child Protective Services as a Tool of Vaccine Enforcement
While a system of holding people in hostage is as old as the oldest war, a fresher note is introduced when a tyrannic state is at war with its own subjects and may hold any citizen in hostage with no law to restrain it. An even more recent improvement is the subtle use of what I shall term “the lever of love” (applied so successfully by the Soviets) of tying a rebel to his wretched country by his own twisted heart strings. ~Vladimir Nabokov, Bend Sinister
Over the past several years, it’s been more and more common to hear stories in the news or through the social grapevine about parents losing their children to the state due to disagreements with doctors or hospital staff. Some of these cases involve children’s medical conditions which are arguably vaccine-related—like the 2014 case involving the late Maryanne Godboldo and the state’s attempt to forcibly sedate her daughter, who Godboldo claimed was vaccine-injured; or the more current case of Joe and Maria Selva’s attempts to treat their daughter’s seizures with (legal) medical cannabis instead of risky standard anti-epileptic drugs.
But over the past year, these stories of state child removal have shifted from possibly vaccine-related to vaccine-contingent, such as the case of vaccine-resistant Florida mother Autumn Ceyten losing four children to the state. Ceyten’s is not an isolated account and follows an increasing number of news stories in which vaccination status played some key role in state charges of parental neglect. Taken together, this creates the appearance of a disturbing but not unexpected trend.
On April 28th, 2015, New York University law professor Mary Holland expected it as she testified before the California Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to SB277, a bill—since passed— that would remove all personal exemptions to vaccination, leaving only impossible-to-acquire medical exemptions for California’s school children.
On the issue of consent, Holland drew a sharp parallel between forced vaccination and rape that angered Chairwoman Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara). When Chairwoman Jackson was done sputtering, Holland asked whether the state would criminalize dissent.
MARY HOLLAND: Furthermore, a problem with SB277 would be in its enforcement…Will you be willing to remove children and force-vaccinate them as wards of the state?
Will you be willing to throw non-vaccinating parents in prison?
And what happens if the state does vaccinate a child who is removed and that child is severely injured or dies?
What will the state do?
SEN. JACKSON: Where in this bill does it talk about throwing parents in prison?
MARY HOLLAND: No, but what will you do? The parents—many of the parents who are…
SEN. JACKSON: I’m sorry but there is nothing in this… I mean, there are enough concerns raised. To kind of push it to a level… Now we are talking about putting parents in prison…
Senator Jackson expressed outrage for several more minutes about Holland’s “inflammatory” suggestions, to which Holland replied, “But I don’t know what you will do.”
Now, in 2017, we’re getting a clearer idea of what they will do. Shortly after Mary Holland testified, various state social services divisions began adding a stipulation that parental failure to get children immunized with all required vaccinations can be categorized as a form of child abuse/neglect and can be grounds for criminal investigation.
From page 14 of the Mandated Reporter Training Educators Training Manual put forth by California Department of Social Services:
Lesson 1 - What to Report:
Other forms of neglect include
- Medical neglect, such as not providing appropriate medical care, dental care, or immunizations
- Emotional neglect, such as not interacting with an infant or child
- Educational neglect, such as not enrolling a child in school or providing proper home-schooling
The addition of the word “immunizations” in the routine language of a standard document seems to be new. Having seen various states’ mandated reporter guides in the past, I know several specifically indicated that vaccination was not in the purview of child protective services and that an investigation could not be launched on those grounds.
The addition of immunization to mandated reporter guidelines isn’t isolated to California and could turn out to be an edict sent down from on high—the US Department of Health and Human Services, the parent agency of Child Protective Services as well as the CDC. Whatever is the case, reports are coming in from teachers in other states that their mandated reporter training modules have changed in the past few years. The following photo of a media presentation given to staff during a mandated reporter training session was taken in an Oklahoma public school:
The teachers in Oklahoma reported that vaccine exemptions were never mentioned during this or any other presentation on the issue. When several individuals attempted to call various regional departments of children and families to inquire about the new language, they were reportedly angrily brushed off, much like Chairwoman Jackson’s stonewalling of Mary Holland.
In any event, it’s clear certain machinery has gone into gear and vaccine industry avatars like UC Hastings assistant law professor Dorit Reiss could not be happier.
During a panel discussion for the National Meningitis Association in May, Reiss— wearing what appears to be a mermaid costume and bedroom slippers—explains how employing police to "force vaccination...certainly isn't easy on anyone. So it's not something done easily. It can be done. But just not done easily“
Evoking unsettling visions of police with military grade tactical gear battering down doors, tasing dads, shooting dogs, putting moms in headlocks and snatching up screaming kids seems quite easy for Reiss. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that, throughout the videotaped meeting, her demeanor is disjointedly cheerful considering the grimness of the topic: her eyes glow, she smiles reflexively and swings her fidgety feet like a contented toddler at story time. But it's apparent by Reiss's mincing grammar why she feels so buoyant: only police are assigned agency and the burden of responsibility regarding the thing she describes being "done." Those directing the doing of it and fabricating legal and moral pretexts for the doing of it remain unburdened, unnamed.