Linus and Terri Baker. Image Source.

Health Impact News Editor Comments

The war against parents who choose not to vaccinate their children, or to not follow the CDC vaccine schedule which requires more vaccines for children in the U.S. than any other developed nation of the world, rages on all across America.

Citizens of the United States are waking up and recognizing that with no legal accountability for pharmaceutical companies to produce safe vaccines in the U.S., unlike most other countries of the world where one can sue a vaccine manufacturer for damages resulting from their vaccine products, the proliferation of vaccines and their known side effects carries tremendous risk of injury and even death.

Parents and physicians in the U.S. are increasingly standing up for their rights to choose medical procedures for their children and resisting coercion by government agencies who seek to mandate vaccines even against the desires of parents and sometimes their physicians as well.

In Johnson County, Kansas, one 2-year old little boy has been taken away from his mother and placed in foster care with his grandparents. The young boy was born with a serious heart defect, and has never been vaccinated. The mother and the grandparents, for both health and religious reasons, have utilized Kansas’ legal vaccine exemption laws to prevent the young boy from being vaccinated.

But since the child has been removed from his mother and placed into the temporary custody of the state of Kansas, the state is now trying to force the child to be vaccinated against the wishes of both his mother and grandparents, even while he continues to live under the care of his grandparents.

Kansas acting as ‘religious police’ in mandating vaccine for grandson, couple argue

by Tony Rizzo
Kansas City Star

Excerpts:

The 2-year-old grandson of Linus and Terri Baker has never been vaccinated.

His mother and the Bakers oppose immunization on religious and health grounds.

But now that the boy is in temporary state custody, the Kansas Department for Children and Families intends to vaccinate him despite the family’s wishes.

The Bakers, who have physical custody of the boy as his foster parents, say it’s an unconstitutional overreach and they are now fighting it in federal court.

The grandparents are particularly galled that DCF appears to be requiring people who want to exempt their children from daycare and school vaccination requirements to cite their denomination and its specific teaching opposed to immunization.

“They’ve become the religious police,” said Linus Baker, a lawyer who lives in southern Johnson County.

The Bakers are seeking to stop the Kansas Department for Children and Families (commonly called DCF) and its contractor, KVC Behavioral Healthcare, from immunizing their grandson, identified as S.F.M.

Officials with DCF and KVC have notified the family that they intend to immunize the child, even though he is currently enrolled in a private, religious day care after Terri Baker provided a religious exemption statement that both the school and Kansas Department of Health and Environment did not contest.

According to the lawsuit, the Bakers’ grandson was born with a heart condition, which required surgery when he was six months old. He is now very healthy, but they don’t know how different vaccines could affect his health.

Terri Baker has also “long been of the Christian faith,” the suit says.

“Part of that faith is having an understanding about vaccines and the risks they pose for children,” according to the suit. “Terri has religious convictions and objections to vaccines using cell lines from tissue harvested from abortions.”

Even more troubling, according to Linus Baker, is that DCF appears to be requiring people who cite the exemption to provide the name of a denomination and its specific teaching opposed to immunization.

Linus Baker asked what if someone is not part of a specific denomination or they have a personal objection not specified in a particular group’s teachings?

If the law does not apply to everyone equally, then it is unconstitutional, he said.

A recently mailed letter from KVC to their daughter, the child’s mother, gave 14 days for one of the child’s parents to assert one of the exemptions in writing or file a written objection with the court handling the child’s child in need of care case.

Imposing the 14-day deadline is “completely arbitrary,” according to the suit.

“Why 14 days when there is no medical necessity or emergency?” the suit asks.

Plus, the letter was sent to an address where the mother no longer resides.

The bottom line for the Bakers is that their grandson is only in state custody temporarily, while having him vaccinated against their wishes is “permanent and irreversible.”

Read the entire article at the Kansas City Star.

Comment on this story at MedicalKidnap.com