California Assembly approves one of the toughest mandatory vaccination laws in the nation

Jun 28, 2015

by Patrick McGreevy and Rong-Gong Lin II

California lawmakers on Thursday approved one of the toughest mandatory vaccination requirements in the nation, moving to end exemptions from state immunization laws based on religious or other personal beliefs.

The measure, among the most controversial taken up by the Legislature this year, would require more children who enter day care and school to be vaccinated against diseases including measles and whooping cough.

Those with medical conditions such as allergies and immune-system deficiencies, confirmed by a physician, would be excused from immunization. And parents could still decline to vaccinate children who attend private home-based schools or public independent studies off campus.

It is unclear whether Gov. Jerry Brown will sign the measure, which grew out of concern about low vaccination rates in some communities and an outbreak of measles at Disneyland that ultimately infected more than 150 people.

“The governor believes that vaccinations are profoundly important and a major public health benefit, and any bill that reaches his desk will be closely considered,” Evan Westrup, the governor’s spokesman, said Thursday.


Read the full article by clicking the name of the source located below.

11 comments on “California Assembly approves one of the toughest mandatory vaccination laws in the nation

  • “This bill puts the state between children and parents regardless of your
    position on vaccination,” said Luke Van der Westhuyzem, a parent from Walnut Creek who was among dozens of protesters at the Capitol.

    Upscale East Bay community ( Walnut Creek–wealthy section of Contra Costa county ) containing woo merchants. The state is also between parents and children in cases of abuse, which is this case. Your woo beliefs do not allow you to abuse your own children or the children of others.



    Report abuse

  • Given that vaccinations are a recent invention, any religious objection has to be some twisted interpretation like JWs considering blood transfusions a form of bleed eating (only Jesus blood will do).



    Report abuse

  • Neodarwinian
    Jun 28, 2015 at 2:55 pm

    Upscale East Bay community ( Walnut Creek –wealthy section of Contra Costa county ) containing woo merchants.

    There seems to be a subliminal poetic connection in that name – with a little editing –

    Baying community scaling up-the-wall in nut-creek!



    Report abuse

  • Baying community scaling up-the-wall in nut-creek!

    No editing needed. That sentence also fits the crime!

    Having been in Walnut Creek a time or two I have seen baying as well as nuttery!



    Report abuse

  • Rhett Krawitt – 7 yrs. old

    Sometimes, a campaign works better bringing out the “small guns”;

    Gov. Brown will look like an ogre if he opposes this cute, pint-sized campaigner. *(parents need to drop the contrived, cringe-worthy GWTW references, tho).



    Report abuse

  • Voice for Choice – we are pulling out all the stops

    Wait until one of your children gets seriously ill, maybe then you’ll slam on the brakes – otherwise you are cold-hearted menaces to society.

    (Edit feature is gone? / or maybe just me)



    Report abuse

  • As a UK citizen, it seems to me that two issues have become conflated here.
    The first thing I see is that everyone has the right to refuse medical treatment if they choose. Here in the UK adults are free to choose for themselves, even if they may die or infect others as a result of refusal. Doctors have to go to court to over rule parents objections to medical treatment.
    Secondly there is the issue of exceptions to legislation on the grounds of belief. To my mind making exceptions to any law weakens all laws. It opens the door to anyone to claim that laws should not apply to them because they disagree with the law due to sincerely held beliefs. Law should apply to all or none, there is no halfway house.



    Report abuse

  • Chris
    Jun 30, 2015 at 10:51 am

    As a UK citizen, it seems to me that two issues have become conflated here.
    The first thing I see is that everyone has the right to refuse medical treatment if they choose.

    That is not so! There are notifiable diseases and quarantine laws.

    Here in the UK adults are free to choose for themselves, even if they may die or infect others as a result of refusal. Doctors have to go to court to over rule parents objections to medical treatment.

    For serious diseases, people in many countries, are not allowed to “choose” to infect others.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/20/us-health-mers-thailand-idUSKBN0OZ09M20150620

    Thailand says 175 exposed to MERS patient; South Korea reports no new case

    A total of 175 people were exposed to Thailand’s only case of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the patient’s condition has improved, the health ministry said on Saturday.

    In a statement, the ministry said it had been in touch with all 175 and had instructed them to stay away from public spaces and for medical personnel to monitor their health.

    In South Korea, the health ministry said that no new cases of the disease had been recorded in the country for the first time in 16 days. Health authorities said on Friday the outbreak first reported on May 20 seemed to have leveled off.

    South Korea’s health ministry said later on Saturday that a 63-year-old male MERS patient with an existing heart ailment and diabetes had died, becoming the 25th fatality in an outbreak that had spread through hospitals and infected 166 people.

    On Friday, Thai health minister Rajata Rajatanavin told reporters the chances of a MERS outbreak in Thailand like the one in South Korea were low as the authorities had isolated the patient quickly.



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.