UK Compulsory Vaccination Imminent
Contrary to assurances given by the UK Government to leading politicians, fears earlier this year that the Government were moving to make the vaccination schedule compulsory for British citizens [including children] without reference to Parliament, and without public debate seem to be being borne out.
The new law introduced by the backdoor obliges the Secretary of State for Health to implement any recommendations of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (HERE ). The newly published draft minutes for the JCVI in February (HERE ) disclose that the new status granted it by Health Minister Dawn Primarolo by executive order in January seem designed to tie up with unmentioned provisions in the new National Health Service Constitution.
According to the JCVI minutes the new NHS constitution states:
‘You have the right to receive the vaccinations that the Joint Committee on Vaccinations and Immunisation recommend that you should receive under an NHS provided national immunisation programme.’
‘You should participate in important public health programmes such as vaccination.’
The minutes state:
‘The JCVI was pleased the recommendations of the committee would have the force of law behind it. The committee asked for clarification on the constitution including what exactly ‘right’ meant with respect to the right of a child to receive a vaccine when their parents were opposed to vaccination and how the constitution affected the recommendations of the JCVI with respect to legal challenge.’
In other words, if a parent does not want a child vaccinated but the JCVI have recommended all children be vaccinated, the JCVI are asking can their recommendation be challenged by the parent. It would seem once they have their answer, they will decide whether or not to make their recommendation. This appears one step from compulsory vaccination for children regardless of parental views or concerns.
If the JCVI decide to make their recommendation, and a legal case ensues this might mean a Guardian is appointed by the State to represent the interests of the child and through the Guardian sue its own parents to insist on the “right” to be vaccinated as mandated by the JCVI. The parents would in effect be forced to defend the case against their own child brought through the Guardian to oppose their own child being vaccinated. Once the first case was decided, the matter would be settled in practical terms for all parents.
Thus, the UK appears to be on the verge of ‘1984′ style legislation and guidelines in which freedoms are taken away from citizens framed in terms of rights granted. And this has happened without political or public debate, scrutiny or democratic vote. Irrespective of the any benefits of a vaccine programme the constitutional implications of this change are concerning. The JCVI is by law now a law unto itself and flexing its muscles despite a history of disregard for safety issues over the past 20 years and more.
It is unclear what ultimate responsibility the JCVI bears for its actions, or if any sanctions apply to it. The criterion for recommendations by the JCVI is purely on “cost-effectiveness” not safety - a re-statement of the committee’s defective historical remit. JCVI members have financial and professional associations with vaccine manufacturers.
No action has been taken to curb this.
Any ordinary concept of legality appears subverted, and power ceded to industry insiders.
This has taken place without democratic reference: compulsory vaccination is not part of any party’s policy and it has never been debated in Parliament.
If this is going to happen at all there should be extensive consultations, safeguards, debate and a vote. Everyone concerned about this matter should urgently contact their MP, whose address can be found (HERE).
John Stone, based in London, is a Contributing Editor for Age of Autism.
We all know that medication has side effects. eg. If penicillian is given to some individuals they will have an allergic reaction or even death. So we don't give it.
So how can the government routinely give all children vaccinations(drugs), and not expect some of those children to have a reaction. Why are'nt children screened first to make sure they are safe to receive such drugs into the body. Once given it is too late.
There are tests that can be performed. The reason why the governement don't do such screening is that it cost too much money. So we allow them to play russin roulette with our children.
Why should the government dicate to parents what ever happened to patient choice?
Parents are responsible for their children's health, so until they have hard evidence that vaccinations introduce into the body are safe, should question all avenues. Children are precious.
Posted by: Dolphin | June 04, 2009 at 05:06 PM
This has already happened in Australia. Even though they have voluntary vaccinations for the public (sure that is soon to change), they have mandated it for health care workers. This is not a hospital rule, but a government mandate. Here's a link to the article:
Who do you think is next...teachers, bus drivers, mall workers, etc. Very Orwellian!
Posted by: Eileen | May 31, 2009 at 07:41 AM
Your point is well taken. And of utmost importance.
Whether or not we can stop these people from hurting our children, history shows that there are some parents who *will* give their life before letting someone hurt their child.
Posted by: Terri Lewis | May 30, 2009 at 06:35 PM
"I shall go to prison rather than allow any of my children to have a vaccine that I knew was un safe"
Joan, I think there would be a distinct possibility that if they went down this line you wouldn't be able to prevent it, even if you did go to jail.
Posted by: John Stone | May 30, 2009 at 06:02 PM
Vaccine used in children causing brain damage? (MMR)
These news video photos of vaccine-damaged children are so shocking......they make the case a thousands times better than anything I've ever written.
My son has MMR/autism and has a turn in his eye!!!
Posted by: Joan Campbell | May 30, 2009 at 05:33 PM
I shall go to prison rather than allow any of my children to have a vaccine that I knew was un safe
Posted by: Joan Campbell | May 30, 2009 at 05:30 PM
The problem, the REAL problem is the apathy that the general population shows toward these kind of issues.
We as the parents of these angels are a small percentage of the population. Until the general population wakes up and stands up things are not bound to change any time soon. Here or anywhere else where apathy is running wild and the government is running out of control.
Posted by: Deborah (www.debstake.wordpress.com | May 29, 2009 at 11:51 PM
Those who find liberty in law should always beware of those taking liberties by law.
Posted by: Media Scholar | May 29, 2009 at 10:42 PM
You are talking about a country that took away guns. If I were a Brit, I would leave the country. I saw the Germans tear down the Brick Wall because they banded together. Ultimately, the British people need to do something, or things will not change.
Posted by: Heidi N | May 29, 2009 at 09:19 PM
Surely the general public have to ask questions about this, everything is hidden in British Government and those who speak out are not heard, or sent to the states.
Posted by: Lara | May 29, 2009 at 07:17 PM
Anew vaccine could be imminent , and so more illness is imminent , more disability if parents believe this spin
Posted by: Deborah Heather | May 29, 2009 at 06:03 PM
OMFG. How can they possibly get away with this? Are they planning to take people to court over what will surely be an inadequately-tested swine flu vax campaign this fall? And what about the question they're NOT asking: What's our liability if we fight parents in court, forcibly vaccinate their child, and the child suffers irreparable harm?
Posted by: Garbo | May 29, 2009 at 03:49 PM
This is scary!!! Positively Orwellian.
Posted by: Twyla | May 29, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Removing parental choice in the matter of vaccination is a truly terrifying prospect. Everyone knows perfectly well that vaccines ALL have potential side effects. Some more serious than others. They are listed by pharmaceutical companies on package inserts. Yet somehow, when these side effects appear it's a 'coincidence' or 'not proven' or 'anecdotal' or 'parental hysteria'. But the establishment stance in UK is that these children who comprise the 'small percentage' of persons who are vaccine damaged, have to be sacrificed for the good of the ‘herd’. More than 900 families in UK have received compensation for vaccine damage. That news never appears in the media though. Why not?
Parents are becoming more and more unwilling to jeopardise the welfare of their offspring for the greater good of the so-called herd.
Then there is the autism issue – as yet unresolved – and numbers rising all the time. Yet another doctor, Dr Andrew Moulden, has come forward explaining the damaging role of vaccines. How many more doctors need to tell us what vaccines are doing to our immune systems before someone somewhere starts listening to these experts?
“Dr. Moulden stresses that "all vaccinations are causing the same
neurological damages as wild polio and other 'vaccine preventable
pathogens did in the past — albeit in an attenuated form. It is not
the germs/toxins that are causing damage; it is the body's non-
specific response to foreign substances entering it. All vaccinations
are 'foreign substances.' Repeat vaccinations serially aggravate the
underlying mechanisms of injury."
Posted by: Seonaid | May 29, 2009 at 11:27 AM
I don't fear terrorists, I fear the government!!!
Posted by: maggie | May 29, 2009 at 11:16 AM
BACK DOOR! I am sick of BACK DOORS - it is corruption, and some thing that needs to be criminalized and some people jailed. For three decades I have thought the majority would wake up and say "Wait a Minute!" But, how can they - the government has become very sly, and tricky. They hire people that have studied decent people's behavior to certain situations. Thomas Paine in "Common Sense" warns that eventually we will accept things just as they are.
Posted by: Benedetta Stilwell | May 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM
The new NHS Constitution can be found here
and the guide here
in includes this text under
2b. Patients and the public – your responsibilities
"You should participate in important public health programmes such as vaccination"
one presumes that the way that this will be policed is that non vaccinators will be struct off the GP's list
Posted by: mark | May 29, 2009 at 09:27 AM
Yes, indeed, freedoms are being taken away. When the government is this corrupt, it's time to overthrow the government.
Posted by: Terri Lewis | May 29, 2009 at 09:12 AM
I'm reminded of that old Far Side cartoon that shows the ice cream truck driving through a neighborhood with a picture of syringe on the side. The creepy driver was whistling to the tune being played over the loud speaker.
Posted by: FedUp | May 29, 2009 at 08:57 AM