Forced Vaccination is Wrong

[1PeaceMaker]

No, because no such thing happened. He was entitled to refuse and walk to the office to call home.

I doubt that. But the article didn't supply enough information for you to assume he hadn't already tried to go up the authority chain.

Students such as this need to be expelled.

He didn't want the needle and was trying to talk them out of their actions. We're talking about a frightened twelve year old boy who is being unduly pressured!

This is force and wrong.

While talking to school staff he “threatened to cause damage to the school,” police said in a news release.

"While talking to school staff" is code for the school staff wouldn't listen when he refused, so he escalated.

 

[Rusha]

I doubt that. But the article didn't supply enough information for you to assume he hadn't already tried to go up the authority chain.

The article didn't supply enough info for you to *assume* he was being physically forced ...

He didn't want the needle and was trying to talk them out of their actions. We're talking about a frightened twelve year old boy who is being unduly pressured!

No CHILD wants a shot, blood test, throat swab, blood pressure check, etc. By allowing them to think they make the decisions at this age, the result is a brat who throws a tantrum.

This is force and wrong.

You need to look up the definition of force. No one held him down and gave him the vaccination. He did NOT receive the vaccination.

"While talking to school staff" is code for the school staff wouldn't listen when he refused, so he escalated.

Most likely for the same reason they don't listen to the children when they say they would rather have art or recess the whole time they are at school. He's a kid. IF parent's wish to allow their children to rule over adults, easy to remedy. Keep them home.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

The article didn't supply enough info for you to *assume* he was being physically forced ...

I don't need to. They panicked him with undue pressure and use of their authority. That's logically the most likely reason for his threats.

No CHILD wants a shot, blood test, throat swab, blood pressure check, etc. By allowing them to think they make the decisions at this age, the result is a brat who throws a tantrum.

When it comes to school vaccines in CA they want children to be able to take vaccines without permission at 12. That must mean they think they are able to consent or refuse medical treatment.

You need to look up the definition of force.

force

noun

: physical strength, power, or effect

: power or violence used on a person or thing

: strength or power that is not physical

No one held him down and gave him the vaccination. He did NOT receive the vaccination.

Did you read that somewhere?

Most likely for the same reason they don't listen to the children when they say they would rather have art or recess the whole time they are at school. He's a kid.

The staff is not his medical team. Vaccines in school is just plain weird. It's more pressure away from parental supervision.

IF parent's wish to allow their children to rule over adults, easy to remedy. Keep them home.

It's not ruling over adults if a 12 year old decides to refuse medical treatment at school.

 

[fzappa13]

No, because no such thing happened. He was entitled to refuse and walk to the office to call home.

Students such as this need to be expelled.

No, Russia, they should go to jail.

 

[zoo22]

No, because no such thing happened. He was entitled to refuse and walk to the office to call home.

Students such as this need to be expelled.

Also, this story is 5 years old.

This is the original article that 1PeaceMaker's "vactruth" article was based on (from 2010):

Boy didn’t want needle, throws tantrum, charged with threatening, Canada National Post

Police say they take school threats seriously — so seriously they charged a 12-year-old boy who threw a tantrum in his elementary school because he didn’t want to take a vaccination needle.

Durham Regional Police said officials from Ross Tilley Public School in Bowmanville, an hour east of Toronto, called them around 12:30 p.m. on Wednesday. The school had been administering vaccinations for hepatitis B and a boy had become upset at the prospect of a needle.

While talking to school staff he “threatened to cause damage to the school,” police said in a news release.

Officers consulted with the Crown attorney’s office and charged the boy with threatening, a criminal charge police said was justified: “due to the age of the child and concerns over public safety.”

The boy, who cannot be named under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, made a verbal threat against the school, police spokesman Dave Selby told CTV.

Mr. Selby told the broadcaster that officers do have the discretion not to lay a charge but decided the alleged threat was serious enough to be considered criminal. “Police take all threats to teachers, administration and school students seriously and advise that anyone over the age of 12 could face criminal charges,” police said in a statement.

The boy faced a bail hearing Wednesday after police went over the situation with the youth’s family.

That's the full and only story that PeaceMaker's "truthvac" article referenced. No more. Everything 1PeaceMaker said happened is based on that single 5-year-old article.

Here's an excerpt from her link:

The National Post said:

“Officers consulted with the Crown attorney’s office and charged the boy with threatening, a criminal charge police said was justified: “due to the age of the child and concerns over public safety.”

This may or may not be true; however, at no time did there appear to be any concern for this child’s welfare. There may have been many reasons why the twelve year old did not want to be vaccinated. These range from being afraid of the needle to being worried about the possible side effects. It could be that Hepatitis B is in fact a disease that is mainly transmitted through sexual intercourse or sharing dirty drug needles!

What kind of garbage is that?

Anyway. Here are a couple more news articles I found that 1PeaceMaker's "vactruth" article didn't reference:

Spoiler

Bowmanville boy, 12, charged with threatening to damage school, Toronto Sun, Nov 2010

TORONTO - A 12-year-old Bowmanville boy was charged after he threw a temper tantrum when he discovered he was getting a hepatitis B inoculation shot, Durham Regional Police said Wedensday.

Officers were called to Dr. Ross Tilley Public School during the lunch hour Tuesday after the lad became upset about the needle, police said.

Police spokesman Dave Selby said the inoculation appears to be what triggered the outburst by the child.

He wouldn't specify exactly what the boy intended on doing but it appears he made a threat that involved damaging the school building on Westside Dr.

After consulting with a Crown attorney, police charged the boy with threatening.

"It is unusual," Selby said.

He said police take all threats to teachers, students, staff and schools seriously and while each case is looked at individually, he said investigators and the Crown believed the incident warranted a charge.

Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board spokesperson Judy Malfara said public health nurses were at the school performing the inoculations when the threat was made by the student.

He "made some general and loud threats against the school" and other students became concerned when they heard them, she said.

School principal Todd Bishop sent a letter home to parents Tuesday explaining the situation.

"While Durham Health Department nurses were here giving students their required immunizations, one of the students became upset. In his efforts to avoid getting a needle, he made several general threats that were overheard by other students," Bishop wrote. "Fortunately, no one was hurt. Nonetheless, in the interests of student safety, we contacted Durham Regional Police immediately. Officers responded quickly and, after conducting a search, they confirmed that there were no weapons at the school, and that students were safe.

"We have reassured the children that school continues to be a safe place," he wrote.

Spoiler

Threatening charge laid against Bowmanville student upset over hep B shot

BOWMANVILLE -- A 12-year-old Bowmanville student who became upset after he discovered he was to receive a needle Tuesday was arrested on a charge of threatening and was held for a bail hearing.

No one was hurt and no weapons were found at Ross Tilley Public School, Durham police said. A school board spokeswoman said the boy threatened to cause damage to the school building.

"We just wanted to send a strong message to everyone out there ... that this will not be tolerated in schools," Durham police spokesman Dave Selby said Wednesday. "We want to let people know that under the Criminal Code, if there is behaviour that warrants it, we will be laying a charge."

Officers charged the boy after consulting with the Crown Attorney's office, Mr. Selby said.

Police said the boy became upset when he learned he was to receive a hepatitis B shot. When school staff spoke to the boy, he threatened to cause damage to the school, police said.

The boy was charged and after police spoke to his family, he was held for a bail hearing.

Judy Malfara, a spokeswoman for the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, said staff contacted police out of concern for other students, who were within earshot when the alleged threats were made.

"The student made several general threats, not against specific individuals, but about damage to the school itself," Ms. Malfara said.

"With any kinds of threats, we do involve the police. Fortunately it's rare, but even one is too many.

"Student safety is the first priority," she said.

Following the midday incident, a letter, in which principal Todd Bishop informed parents of the incident and actions taken by staff, was sent home with students.

"(Police) officers responded quickly and, after conducting a search, they confirmed that there were no weapons at the school, and that students were safe," the letter stated.

The decision to charge and hold the student was made at the discretion of police, Ms. Malfara said. She added the student is not currently at the school.

The boy, whose name is protected under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, was charged with a single count of threatening.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

No, Russia, they should go to jail.

Unless they are twelve and saying "yes" against their parent's wishes.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

A Canadian boy, 12, was arrested for resisting vaccination. Really, it should have been school staff!

(Sorry, 1PM. I tried getting to the article twice and twice my virus protector said that there was a virus associated with the webpage. Nori)

No problem, Nori. I didn't get that warning on my page. I didn't get a virus, either. :liberals:

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Also, this story is 5 years old.

This is the original article that 1PeaceMaker's "vactruth" article was based on (from 2010):

That's the full and only story that PeaceMaker's "truthvac" article referenced. No more.

Yeah, that was what I expected Rusha to draw her conclusions from, not the commentary but the news article, since I just link jumped... I accidentally gave you guys vactruth when I wanted to give the Post. My bad.

And the police give us no actual information to confirm or deny any part of the story.

But remember folks, the po-po never lie. atrol:

Everything 1PeaceMaker said happened is based on that single 5-year-old article.

Here's an excerpt from her link:

I didn't make a claim about the article that isn't supported.

What kind of garbage is that?

Garbage I didn't think to post. It's just her trying to speculate like all good bloggers do.

Anyway. Here are a couple more news articles I found that 1PeaceMaker's "vactruth" article didn't reference:

What's the big deal with your amazing quotes? Aside from the fact that I didn't have time to look for them and wished I could have, yesterday...

Oh is this it? "health nurses were at the school performing the inoculations when the threat was made by the student."

They were telling him he wasn't getting out of it, weren't they? Since only the honest po-po told anything to the news, we can only reasonably assume what staff said. They conviniently omitted that.

All we have for sure is a boy refuses and is panicked by a vaccine and when "no" didn't seem to work he escalated.

He wouldn't specify exactly what the boy intended on doing

He probably said something like, "you stick me with that needle and I'll dump your glass vials on the floor." That's both reasonable on his part (for 12) and easy to predict, having raised 12 year olds, myself, and would be costly enough to anger school staff.

"While Durham Health Department nurses were here giving students their required immunizations, one of the students became upset. In his efforts to avoid getting a needle, he made several general threats that were overheard by other students," Bishop wrote. "Fortunately, no one was hurt. Nonetheless, in the interests of student safety, we contacted Durham Regional Police immediately. Officers responded quickly and, after conducting a search, they confirmed that there were no weapons at the school, and that students were safe.

Of course. This is just basic refusal.

"We have reassured the children that school continues to be a safe place," he wrote.

Translation: Kids, we will continue to inoculate you, whether you consent or not. We are safe from being held accountable and only our story will be told.

BOWMANVILLE -- A 12-year-old Bowmanville student who became upset after he discovered he was to receive a needle Tuesday was arrested on a charge of threatening and was held for a bail hearing.

No one was hurt and no weapons were found at Ross Tilley Public School, Durham police said. A school board spokeswoman said the boy threatened to cause damage to the school building.

"We just wanted to send a strong message to everyone out there ... that this will not be tolerated in schools,"

Translation: in school, if you are 12, no means yes, and resistance will be met with jail and bail.

Durham police spokesman Dave Selby said Wednesday. "We want to let people know that under the Criminal Code, if there is behaviour that warrants it, we will be laying a charge."

Except if it's school staff. That came through loud and clear.

"Student safety is the first priority," she said.

Even though students were not ever threatened or unsafe because of this boy.

Following the midday incident, a letter, in which principal Todd Bishop informed parents of the incident and actions taken by staff, was sent home with students.

We'll learn ya, kids, take yer shots or go to jail. Resistance is futile.

The decision to charge and hold the student was made at the discretion of police, Ms. Malfara said. She added the student is not currently at the school.

The po-po are quoted that their discretion = any charge they can legally lay on you, even if you are 12.

if there is behaviour that warrants it, we will be laying a charge...

See?

 

[Rusha]

Yeah, that was what I expected Rusha to draw her conclusions from, not the commentary but the news article, since I just link jumped... I accidentally gave you guys vactruth when I wanted to give the Post. My bad.

And the police give us no actual information to confirm or deny any part of the story.

But remember folks, the po-po never lie. atrol:

I didn't make a claim about the article that isn't supported.

Garbage I didn't think to post. It's just her trying to speculate like all good bloggers do.

What's the big deal with your amazing quotes? Aside from the fact that I didn't have time to look for them and wished I could have, yesterday...

Oh is this it? "health nurses were at the school performing the inoculations when the threat was made by the student."

They were telling him he wasn't getting out of it, weren't they? Since only the honest po-po told anything to the news, we can only reasonably assume what staff said. They conviniently omitted that.

All we have for sure is a boy refuses and is panicked by a vaccine and when "no" didn't seem to work he escalated.

He probably said something like, "you stick me with that needle and I'll dump your glass vials on the floor." That's both reasonable on his part (for 12) and easy to predict, having raised 12 year olds, myself, and would be costly enough to anger school staff.

Of course. This is just basic refusal.

Translation: Kids, we will continue to inoculate you, whether you consent or not. We are safe from being held accountable and only our story will be told.

Translation: in school, if you are 12, no means yes, and resistance will be met with jail and bail.

Except if it's school staff. That came through loud and clear.

Even though students were not ever threatened or unsafe because of this boy.

We'll learn ya, kids, take yer shots or go to jail. Resistance is futile.

The po-po are quoted that their discretion = any charge they can legally lay on you, even if you are 12.

See?

Well, after such a fact based, rational argument, I am convinced. No doubt those evil po-po were also part of the conspiracy.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Well, after such a fact based, rational argument, I am convinced. No doubt those evil po-po were also part of the conspiracy.

Was the point to make an example of the child, or not?

Is the California vaccination law I referenced okay?

Can a child give or refuse medical consent at 12 or not?

Was the child's side of the story told or not?

 

[1PeaceMaker]

No doubt those evil po-po were also part of the conspiracy.

Oh, no. They never lie or involve themselves in any conspiracy, especially such an easy one.

Staff sent letters to the students in an effort to make an example of the child, not telling the child's side of the story.

No, we have no conspiracy to do any thing ever in any country of the world, even petty little collusions like against stubborn child-vax refusers.

 

[Rusha]

Was the point to make an example of the child, or not?

The point is that children are not given a green light to destroy or make threats to destroy school property.

Is the California vaccination law I referenced okay?

It's allowed ... just as responding to the reference is allowed.

Can a child give or refuse medical consent at 12 or not?

In a public school. Certainly, as long as they understand there are consequences for their refusal ... such as not being allowed to attend.

Was the child's side of the story told or not?

I didn't see a link with a interview from the child explaining how having a tantrum and making threats is a valid response.

 

[Rusha]

Oh, no. They never lie or involve themselves in any conspiracy, especially such an easy one.

Staff sent letters to the students in an effort to make an example of the child, not telling the child's side of the story.

No, we have no conspiracy to do any thing ever in any country of the world, even petty little collusions like against stubborn child-vax refusers.

Uh huh. Because all the proof you need is the fact that you are against vaccinations so any negative response in regards to vaccinations is justified.

The kid threw a tantrum. Had he simply walked out of the classroom, to the office and told the staff he needed his parent/guardian to pick him up, none of this would have happened.

I don't think it is okay for children to throw tantrums because they don't get their own way. Why do you?

 

[Tyrathca]

Can a child give or refuse medical consent at 12 or not?

This will obviously vary slightly depending on jurisdiction however in general no medical ethics (and thus most laws) say no to each. It is not an absolute exclusion but children of this age and older are rarely deemed to be "competent" in this regard. (I'm mostly basing this of Commonwealth laws but my impression is that the USA is not grossly different)

 

[1PeaceMaker]

The point is that children are not given a green light to destroy or make threats to destroy school property.

Even if they are being threatened with medical assault and are refusing to participate. Got it.

It's allowed ... just as responding to the reference is allowed.

What a duck.

In a public school. Certainly...

How about a Catholic school? This one references a "Bishop" as part of the story.

as long as they understand there are consequences for their refusal ... such as not being allowed to attend.

Expulsion is one thing for a private school. This was jail and bail.

I could even understand some disciplinary actions in a private school setting that doesn't violate student rights.

But a school that is this pushy deserves to see it's student body walk out. They should all expel themselves if this is how they will be treated for refusing a medical procedure when healthy.

I didn't see a link with a interview from the child explaining how having a tantrum and making threats is a valid response.

Nope, you don't even know what really happened. All you know for sure is that a judge appears to have sided with their cause, as well as reporters who were not interested in what the family or child would say.

They did not seek an interview or they would have said so.

 

[Rusha]

Even if they are being threatened with medical assault and are refusing to participate. Got it.

Obviously you don't *got it*. Anyone who describes a vaccination THAT wasn't given as an assault doesn't get it.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Uh huh. Because all the proof you need is the fact that you are against vaccinations so any negative response in regards to vaccinations is justified.

The kid threw a tantrum. Had he simply walked out of the classroom, to the office and told the staff he needed his parent/guardian to pick him up, none of this would have happened.

I don't think it is okay for children to throw tantrums because they don't get their own way. Why do you?

I have no proof that he threw a tantrum. He was trying to use his words to keep people from assaulting him with a needle. No hitting or violence was used. No violent threats against persons were made. The only endangered thing appeared to be a bit of school property.

 

[zoo22]

Oh, no. They never lie or involve themselves in any conspiracy, especially such an easy one.

Staff sent letters to the students in an effort to make an example of the child, not telling the child's side of the story.

No, we have no conspiracy to do any thing ever in any country of the world, even petty little collusions like against stubborn child-vax refusers.

? You really get that from this...

"While Durham Health Department nurses were here giving students their required immunizations, one of the students became upset. In his efforts to avoid getting a needle, he made several general threats that were overheard by other students. Fortunately, no one was hurt. Nonetheless, in the interests of student safety, we contacted Durham Regional Police immediately. Officers responded quickly and, after conducting a search, they confirmed that there were no weapons at the school, and that students were safe. We have reassured the children that school continues to be a safe place."

You're weaving some tall tales. A kid threw a fit, made threats, the police were called. The school sent a note home to parents explaining what happened, what was done about it, and assuring them that their kids were safe.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Obviously you don't *got it*. Anyone who describes a vaccination THAT wasn't given as an assault doesn't get it.

Proof it wasn't given?

 

[1PeaceMaker]

? You really get that from this... You weave some tall tales.

Not from that one paragraph. No threats were made against persons, you can read that for yourself.

That report, as told by only one-sided staff, did not include the words of the child, and the words of the child are quoted nowhere.