Source: http://sites.uchastings.edu/lawandvaccines/category/parental-rights/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 04:57:12+00:00

Document:
May 11, 2016 Children's rights, Constitutional law and vaccines, Exemptions, Freedom of religion, Parental Rights, School immunization requirementsReiss, Dorit R.
School immunization requirements are constitutional (Zucht v. King, 260 U.S. 174, 177 (1922): (no exemption in that case).
Parental rights & religious freedom do not overcome child’s welfare. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944): Case focused on child labor law; had a comment addressing compulsory vaccination.
Neutral, generally applicable laws can be applied even to those with religious opposition. Emp’t Div., Dep’t of Human Res. of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 890 (1990).
Most recently, principles applied in: Phillips v. City of New York, (2015, 2nd circuit) (cert denied).
A State Religious Freedom Restoration Act can be overcome by subsequent legislation, and hence does not prevent abolishing the religious exemption either. In addition, at least one case suggested preventing infectious disease is a compelling state interest: Workman v. Mingo Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 419 F. App’x 348, 353–54 (4th Cir. 2011) (per curiam).
Most courts ruled: you cannot limit the exemption to organized religion. Dalli v. Bd. of Educ., 267 N.E.2d 219, 222–23 (Mass. 1971); Brown, 378 So. 2d at 223, cert. denied, 449 U.S. 887 (1980). One exception – Kentucky – overturned later by legislature.
If the legislature did not require a show of sincerity for a religious exemption, several courts ruled that officials cannot demand a show of sincerity. In re LePage, 18 P.3d 1177, 1180 (Wyo. 2001); Dep’t of Health v. Curry, 722 So. 2d 874, 878–79 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998).
Belonging to a religion that supports vaccines does not mean someone can be denied an exemption: focus on personal belief, not orthodoxy. Berg v. Glen Cove City Sch. Dist., 853 F. Supp. 651 (E.D.N.Y. 1994); Matter of Shmuel G. v. Rivka G., 800 N.Y.S.2d 357 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 2005).
Is a Religious Exemption a Good Idea?
Respect for religious values and religious freedoms. Unfair to put child at risk because of parents’ religious belief – child did not choose religion.
As long as numbers small enough, does not undermine herd immunity, little or no risk. Jurisprudence makes it impossible to limit numbers of those using exemption – very hard to police – so does undermine herd immunity & creates risk.
Jurisprudence that makes it hard to police encourages people to lie & unfairly advantages good liars.
No mainstream religion opposes vaccination. Even Christian Science does not directly prohibit it – especially if legally required. See: Mary Baker Eddy, The First Church of Christ, Scientist, and Miscellany 219–20 (1917); Christian Science Sentinel, http://sentinel.christianscience.com/concordapi/ view?q=quarrel+vaccination&book=tfccs.main.pw.my&verbatim=1 (last visited Aug. 1, 2014).
June 25, 2015 Anti-Vaccine, Children's rights, Constitutional law and vaccines, Explaining Legal Concepts, Legal news: New articles or cases, Legislation, Parental Rights, School immunization requirementsReiss, Dorit R.
June 25, 2015 Constitutional law and vaccines, Legal news: New articles or cases, Legislation, Parental Rights, School immunization requirements, Tort LiabilityReiss, Dorit R.
“Several people have asked me whether having school mandates is in tension with the idea of informed consent. The answer is no. While school mandates have some effect on parental autonomy, the doctrine of informed consent should not be conflated with autonomy.
April 21, 2015 Anti-Vaccine, Children's rights, Parental Rights, School immunization requirements, Science, Tools to increase immunization ratesReiss, Dorit R.
“This piece is a summary of Herd Immunity and Immunization Policy: The Importance of Accuracy, soon to be published in v. 94 of Oregon Law Review.
In an article that was published in the Oregon Law Review in 2014, authors Holland and Zachary claimed that school immunization mandates are inappropriate because they reject the concept that herd immunity works.
April 7, 2015 Anti-Vaccine, Children's rights, Exemptions, Parental Rights, School immunization requirements, Tools to increase immunization ratesReiss, Dorit R.
March 31, 2015 Anti-Vaccine, Children's rights, Constitutional law and vaccines, Exemptions, Parental Rights, School immunization requirements, Tools to increase immunization ratesReiss, Dorit R.
“In reaction to the outbreak, politicians in many states proposed bills tightening exemptions from school immunization requirements. This short article examines the law and legislative trends in this area.
Several states have exemption rates that are too high to preserve herd immunity. Oregon, at 7.1%, is at a high risk. California has a low rate of exemptions overall, but has areas where rates of immunization are low.Maine, Michigan, and Washington all have high exemption rates. These states all face a real risk of disease. At least tightening these exemptions is a powerful idea.
Religious exemptions are completely inappropriate due to their vulnerability to abuse and the unfairness of putting the child at risk for beliefs the parents hold and the child is too young to choose. On the other hand, however, a system that does not leave parents any way to refuse vaccination is too extreme.
January 28, 2015 Anti-Vaccine, Children's rights, Constitutional law and vaccines, Family Law, Parental Rights, RebuttalReiss, Dorit R.
This post, written with Arthur Caplan, responds to Alan Phillips’ claim that a law proposed in New York, a law that would allow teen agers to consent to certain vaccines – the HPV and Hepatitis B vaccine – without needing parental permission is unconstitutional and illegal. The post explains why the law is both legal and justified.
January 28, 2015 Anti-Vaccine, Children's rights, Exemptions, National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, Parental Rights, RebuttalReiss, Dorit R.
The Maine Coalition for Vaccine Choice proposed a very problematic law that could mislead parents into not vaccinating because of false claims and would go against public policy. This post explains the problems with the law.
January 27, 2015 Children's rights, Family Law, Legal news: New articles or cases, Parental RightsReiss, Dorit R.
January 27, 2015 Children's rights, Constitutional law and vaccines, Exemptions, Freedom of religion, Parental Rights, School immunization requirementsReiss, Dorit R.
The fifth post in a series published with Shot of Prevention examining the tension between a child’s right to health and parental rights, and what can be done to protect children. This post looks at school immunization requirements and how they can protect children from non-vaccination.
January 27, 2015 Children's rights, Parental RightsFamily law, OutbreaksReiss, Dorit R.
The fourth post in a series published with Shot of Prevention examining the tension between a child’s right to health and parental rights, and what can be done to protect children. This post examines under what circumstances can parental rights be completely overcome: when can children be vaccinated in spite of parental resistance.
January 27, 2015 Children's rights, Parental Rights, Tools to increase immunization rates, Tort LiabilityReiss, Dorit R.
The second post in a series published with Shot of Prevention examining the tension between a child’s right to health and parental rights, and what can be done to protect children. This post looks at whether children harmed by a preventable disease because the parent did not vaccinate them can sue the parent.
January 27, 2015 Children's rights, Constitutional law and vaccines, Parental RightsReiss, Dorit R.
The first post in a series published with Shot of Prevention examining the tension between a child’s right to health and parental rights, and what can be done to protect children. This first installment sets the framework for the series.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.