This week, Senator Pan announced the development of the legislative Vaccine Work Group. Members of this group include Senaors Pan, Weiner, and Newman, as well as Assembly Members Weber, Wicks, Aguiar-Curry, and Low. Their goal is to develop “cohesive and comprehensive, evidence-based policies” to stop the spread of COVID-19 and other diseases while “battling misinformation.”
For months, A Voice for Choice Advocacy has sounded the warning that at least five BAD vaccine related bills are being considered for the 2022 legislative session. The first of those, SB 866, was introduced yesterday by key members of the Vaccine Work Group: Senators Wiener and Pan and Assembly Member Wicks, with Senator Josh Newman and Assembly Members Aguiar-Curry, Friedman, Low, Ting, and Weber as co-authors.
SB 866 would remove parental consent and “authorize a minor 12 years of age or older to consent to vaccines that meet specified federal agency criteria. The bill would authorize a vaccine provider, as defined, to administer a vaccine pursuant to the bill, but would not authorize the vaccine provider to provide any service that is otherwise outside the vaccine provider’s scope of practice.”
Note: CA already allows minors 12 years and older to consent to vaccines for sexually transmitted diseases, such as HPV and Hepatitis B. Rhode Island and South Carolina permit minors 16 years and older to consent to vaccines, Oregon permits minors 15 years and older, Alabama permits minors 14 years and older, and Washington D.C. permits minors 11 years and older.
The main issues with the bill are as follows:
- The bill subverts the right and duty of parents to make informed decisions about whether or not their children should receive medical treatment, without any finding that the parent is unfit.
- The bill creates a structure of distrust between the parent, the child, and healthcare providers.
- While some minors 12 and older may make rational, informed decisions about other issues in their lives, others of the same age have varying levels of maturity. Furthermore, significant changes in adolescent brains mean minors 12 and older are, more than at any other age, disproportionately swayed by peer pressure, lack of self-regulation, and rewards. Over the past year, food and beverages, lottery tickets, peer pressure, and much more have been employed as incentives to push the COVID-19 vaccine. This preys adolescents’ immature cognition and prevents them from making unbiased, informed decisions.
- Minors may not know their full medical history and the potential risks of vaccination, and they will not possess knowledge of what to look for if they do have an adverse reaction. If parents are unaware of their child’s vaccination status, treatment of a serious adverse reaction could very well be delayed, given that the parents couldn’t accurately convey their child’s medical history.
- When vaccine providers make decisions for a minor, they’re annexing the role of a caring parent or guardian who has specific knowledge of their child’s medical needs. But, under the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act and the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, they also maintain zero liability if a child dies or suffers serious injuries directly from a vaccine. Clearly, this leaves unconsenting parents fully responsible for the care of their injured child.
- If minors 12 and older have the right to consent to vaccines without their parents’ involvement, then these children should also have the right to decline vaccines without their parents’ involvement.
- The bill “would not authorize the vaccine provider to provide any service that is otherwise outside the vaccine provider’s scope of practice.” By not limiting treatment during a vaccination visit, the bill allows for broad medical treatment for minors 12 and older during a visit where a vaccination is also administered, given that most pediatric vaccine providers are physicians or pharmacists.
While A Voice for Choice Advocacy vehemently oppose this bill, over the years, we have discovered that opposing bills outright that are authored by unwavering legislators and supported by powerful organizations such as the California Medical Association is not an effective strategy. We will therefore oppose the bill unless amended and we ask you to do the same when meeting with your State Senator. The additional language requested is:
- Change the age of consent to vaccines to minors 16 years of age or older.
- Mirror the San Francisco order, to ensure that all efforts are made to contact the parents prior to vaccination.
- To require the vaccine provider to obtain complete medical history from the minor’s primary care provider, if they are not such provider, and to conduct a full physical examination and evaluation of the child prior to vaccinating, consistent with the relevant standard of care.
- To require minors who do not have parental consent to be vaccinated in a physician’s office, not at a school clinic, mass vaccination site, pharmacy, reproductive care clinic, or other location.
- To ensure that minors who do not have parental consent will in no way be bribed, bullied, or coerced to get a vaccination.
- To require that the parents of minors who do not have parental consent be notified immediately after the vaccination is administered.
- To require the vaccine provider to take on all financial liability for the treatment of any vaccine adverse reaction, injury, or death related to the vaccine administered.
- To allow minors who do not have parental consent to not only have the ability to consent to vaccination without parental input, but also have the ability to decline vaccination without parental input.
- To amend (c) so that it reads: “would not authorize the vaccine provider to provide any service that is otherwise outside the vaccine provider’s scope of practiceother than vaccination.”
Over the past seven years, A Voice for Choice Advocacy has established itself as the leading legislative organization lobbying for your health rights at the California Capitol. While A Voice for Choice Advocacy’s lobbying activity in the Capitol is important, your positive constituent relationships with your CA State Senator and Assembly Member and their staff are critical to assisting with A Voice for Choice Advocacy’s efforts.