Long Article on Vacination Issues

[lesliepear]

What was supposed to be a joyous occasion - the birth of their first
child - turned out to be an Orwellian nightmare for a young Colorado
couple whose newborn was vaccinated for hepatitis B over their
religious and philosophical objections, while armed guards stood by to
prevent them from intervening.

"It makes me feel like the country I live in is no better than
communist China or the old Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, and that's a
very sobering and scary outlook," the father, who does not want to be
named, told WorldNetDaily.

The saga of "Baby M," as the family calls her to protect her privacy,
started with an emergency Caesarean section at St. Mary's Hospital in
in Grand Junction, Colo., on April 2. The couple, who has no medical
insurance, had attempted to home birth but wound up rushing to the
emergency room after the baby's position went transverse.

"Baby M" was born without complication. But as the new parents were
basking in the afterglow of the birth, a neonatal doctor informed them
a vaccination was in order for the baby and pressured the couple to
sign a consent form.

"He told me the initial screening test [on the mother] had come back
positive for hepatitis B. I told him that was impossible," said the
father. "And he said, 'Well, I didn't think it was very likely either
so I had them run it again and I'll probably get those test results
back soon. If those test results come back positive again, then I'm
going to have to vaccinate the baby.'"

According to the couple's personal physician, the screening test gives
a false-positive 40 to 60 percent of the time.

A call for comment from the neonatal physician was not returned.

After the second test also came back positive, the doctor insisted the
couple sign the consent form. Citing text he referenced in a medical
guide, he informed the parents that the baby must be vaccinated within
12 hours of birth, if the mother has hepatitis B.

Said the father: "We said that we weren't going to authorize him to do
so because we did not believe she had hepatitis B and that we believe
vaccinations would not be good for the baby even if she did, based
upon our religious convictions and also medical evidence."

While not eschewing modern medicine, the couple prefers to avoid it
when possible and has a strong conviction against vaccinations.

"We believe in God, and that God has created us in his image. In being
created in God's image, we are given his perfect immune system. We are
bestowed with His gift, the immune system. We believe it is
sacrilegious and a violation of our sacred religious beliefs to violate
what God has given us by showing a lack of faith in God.
Immunizations are a lack of faith in God and His protection, the immune
system," the father maintains.

Vaccination danger

The couple had also done extensive research into the potential serious
dangers of vaccinations.

WorldNetDaily reported last week that various studies indicate there is
epidemiological evidence of a link between neurodevelopmental disorders
and mercury exposure from childhood vaccines. Many medical experts
suspect vaccines may be behind a growing epidemic of autism in American
children. According to data provided by the U.S. Department of
Education, most states experienced a doubling of the rate of children
diagnosed with full-syndrome autism over the past few years.

"U.S. infants are exposed to mercury levels from their
childhood-immunization schedule that far exceed the EPA [Environmental
Protection Agency] and FDA [Food and Drug Administration]-established
maximum permissible levels for the daily oral ingestion of methyl
mercury," wrote Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetic Centers of
America, in a recently published study in the Journal of American
Physicians and Surgeons.

According to Geier, the EPA limit is 0.1 micrograms of mercury per
kilogram body weight per day.

"It doesn't take a genius to do the calculations when on their day of
birth children are given the hepatitis B vaccine, which is 12.5
micrograms of mercury," Geier told Insight magazine. "The average
newborn weighs between six and seven pounds, so they would be allowed
0.3 micrograms of mercury but in this one shot they are getting 12.5
micrograms. That's 39 times more than allowed by law."

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 12,000
infants are infected with hepatitis B every year by their mother during
birth. Infants and children who become infected with hepatitis B are at
the highest risk of developing life-long infection, which often leads
to death from liver disease and liver cancer. Approximately 25 percent
of children who become infected with life-long hepatitis are expected
to die of a related disease as adults.

The National Network for Immunization Information, or NNii, a resource
for parents recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics, or AAP,
maintains the vaccine is "safe."

NNii addresses the risk of mercury in the vaccine in a fact sheet
posted on its website. It explains that Thimerosal, a derivative of
mercury, has been used in "small amounts" as a preservative in some
vaccine and states "there is no evidence that any child has been harmed
by exposure to the amounts of Thimerosal in vaccines."

"In addition, the risk of disease from not immunizing a child is
greater than the risk of exposure to low levels of mercury in
Thimerosal-containing vaccines," the fact sheet states, but then adds
the U.S. Public Health Service and the AAP recommended reducing or
eliminating the use of Thimerosal-containing vaccines "to make safe
vaccines even safer."

NNii states "infants are at high risk for hepatitis B infection if
their mothers are infected with the virus" and recommends these infants
be given the hepatitis B vaccine "within 12 hours of birth."

NNii adds that most children who become infected with hepatitis B are
born to mothers who are not infected with hepatitis B, and as a result,
further recommends all children be vaccinated.

The AAP recommends the first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine be
administered to infants born to infected mothers "before they leave the
hospital."

'Emergency' hearing

Faced with opposition from the parents over the vaccination of "Baby
M," the doctor called in hospital social service worker Joni Vohs, who
reportedly threatened the parents with the loss of custody of their
baby if they did not comply with the vaccination schedule.

Next, hospital administrators called in attorneys who persuaded Chief
District Court Judge Charles Buss to hold an emergency, after-hours
hearing at the hospital on the basis that the baby's life would be in
danger if she was not vaccinated within hours. The family was given 15
minutes' notice of the hearing and was unable to secure competent legal
help in time.

As the father describes it, he went up against a 10-person panel of
attorneys, social workers, hospital administrators and the doctor who
argued for the immediate vaccination.

The father pleaded for second opinions. He also pleaded for the judge
to wait for the results of a more confirmatory test which were
scheduled to arrive in 16 hours.

During the four-hour hearing, the father cited the Constitution, the
Declaration of Independence and Colorado revised statute, which states
there are religious, medical and philosophical exemptions to medical
treatment.

Rather than share the 19-year-old's passion for U.S. constitutional
history, the lawyers reportedly mocked him.

"When I was reading, the lawyers were whispering back and forth almost
laughing at me," the father told WorldNetDaily. "In retrospect,
reminding them of the Constitution hurt me more than it helped."

The judge ruled the baby should be vaccinated immediately and also
ordered her put into protective custody with the Mesa County Department
of Human Services, which the parents were told meant social-service
agents had the ability to intervene in the medical treatment of the
baby at any time and could take physical custody of the baby if deemed
necessary to "protect the child's best interests."

A call for comment from Buss was referred to judicial administrator
Judy Vanderleest. Vanderleest told WorldNetDaily the judge would not
comment on the case. She also said the emergency, after-hours hearing
held at the hospital was the first such hearing held that she could
remember.

Matt Weber, an attorney who represented St. Mary's Hospital told
WorldNetDaily he was "not authorized to speak on behalf of the hospital
on this case."

With armed guards lining the ICU, the first of three ordered
vaccinations was administered to the baby. According to the family's
physician, the baby immediately exhibited the typical side effects of
the vaccine.

A day later, the third hepatitis B screening on the mom came back
negative.

By the time the second shot was due to be administered, the father had
succeeded in persuading county social worker Dan Overmeyer the
vaccination posed more risk than good for the baby's health. Overmeyer
opted to not administer any more shots and recommended the release of
"Baby M" from protective custody.

Overmeyer was unavailable for comment.

While the baby appears to be doing fairly well, the parents fear the
damage is already done, and can only wait and wonder when the adverse
effects of the vaccine will appear.

"Most of the doctors that I've talked to from around the country that
know about vaccinations have said that it takes months and sometimes
years for things to show up," the father told WorldNetDaily. "The scary
thing is that there are babies that just die out of the blue supposedly
for no reason. ... There's a lot of evidence that these SIDS [Sudden
Infant Death Syndrome] victims are actually a result of vaccination."

The Institute of Medicine, a medical research organization that
provides health information to the government, released a report last
March that concluded all available evidence shows no link between
vaccines and unexplained infant deaths.

Religious persecution?

Having recently graduated from college with an associate's degree in
telecommunications engineering, the father has now launched a campaign
to alert expecting parents about his family's ordeal. He posted their
story online with a link to an article outlining the research behind
the dangers of vaccinations.

"I want [parents] to know that their rights are no longer being upheld
by our government," he said. "If people don't speak out and voice their
disapproval and talk to their congressman and make a big deal out of
things like this then we will find ourselves very soon in a sort of
police state where we have no individual freedoms and the government
tells us what to do, what not to do and basically raises our children
for us."

The website includes a link for readers to make contributions to a
legal defense fund. The family hopes to raise sufficient funds to sue
the hospital. They feel both the hospital staff and the judge
persecuted them for their religious conviction against vaccinations.

"The doctor and hospital thought we would be easy targets as we were
young and penniless. They do not like people who try to avoid the
system and they don't like anyone to question whether or not their
practices are truly in the best interests of the patient," the father
said. "Our aim in legal action would be to get a precedent that
protects families from this ever happening again."

Kim Williams, the director of marketing at St. Mary's Hospital declined
to discuss the case, citing the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996, which outlines patient-confidentiality
rules.

Social worker Joni Vohs adamantly denied the hospital would persecute
anyone over their religious beliefs or discriminate against them
because of a lack of insurance.

"St. Mary's is a Catholic hospital. We treat everybody regardless of
their ability to pay. It's a very compassionate and caring place."

After stressing she was bound by confidentiality rules not to discuss
the details, Vohs said the "Baby M" case triggered her recollection of
another case in which a 13-year-old girl died a "very slow death"
because the family belonged to a church that "believed in prayers over
medical treatment" and failed to seek treatment for her until she was
almost dead.

"Having worked in child protection for 25 years, to allow a child to
suffer or die a horrible death is child abuse," Vohs told WorldNetDaily.

Colorado legislators passed a law as a result of that case which allows
the court to step in and override parents' religious beliefs in the
event of a medical emergency. Vohs said this law was applied to the
"Baby M" case.

"The hospital doesn't do anything on a whim. There's a lot of steps
that need to be taken. There was a legal hearing ... and the law was
followed," she said.

She also added that the family's story posted online "stretches and
alters" the truth in the case.

"Baby M's" father argues there was no emergency and emphasizes that had
the staff simply waited the 16 hours for the third, more confirmatory
test of the mother's blood to come back negative, the entire
"nightmare" could have been avoided.