Video: Natural Cancer Cure? Man Cures Himself Then Thrown In Jail ( YOU CAN'T CALL IT A CURE )
Showing posts with label Big Brother. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Brother. Show all posts
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Thursday, March 5, 2015
New WHO guidelines advise lowering sugar intake
By Sally Robertson, BSc - Medical News
New World Health Organization guidelines recommend that people reduce their daily free sugar intake to less than 10% of their total calorie intake, with a reduction to 5% representing a further target.
“Making policy changes to support this will be key if countries are to live up to their commitments to reduce the burden of noncommunicable diseases,” says Dr Francesco Branca, Director of WHO’s Department of Nutrition for Health and Development.
Gayvoronskaya_Yana / Shutterstock.com
Free sugars are the monosaccharides and disaccharides added to food and drink by manufacturers, cooks or consumers, as well as the sugars that occur naturally in fruit juice or honey, for example. The WHO guideline does not refer to the sugars found in fresh fruit and vegetables or milk, as no evidence exists to suggest that those sugars adversely affect our health.
Alison Tedstone, Director of the Diet and Obesity team, Public Health England, says surveys show that the average current daily free sugar intake among adults in the UK accounts for 11.6% of the total calorie intake, while among children it accounts for 15.2%.
The recommendation of less than 10% is based on a review of scientific evidence showing that a lower sugar intake among adults is associated with lower body weight and, among children, it is associated with a reduced likelihood of overweight and obesity. Furthermore, the evidence supports that an intake higher than 10% is associated with increased rates of tooth decay.
Dr Branca says:
We have solid evidence that keeping intake of free sugars to less than 10% of total energy intake reduces the risk of overweight, obesity and tooth decay
The quality of the evidence reviewed means that WHO can rank the recommendation as “strong” and therefore suitable for implementation as policy in most situations. The plans will now be subjected to public consultation, with firm recommendations expected to be put in place this summer and translated into food-based dietary guidelines and public health interventions to reduce sugar intake. Examples of such interventions include a reduction in the marketing of sugary food to children and the introduction of nutrition labeling for food products.
However, due to obesity rates rising worldwide, many experts believe that a goal of less than 10% is still too high and campaign group “Action for Sugar” is pressing for 5% to become the new target. Although the WHO now acknowledge that further health benefits can be achieved if the 5% goal is implemented, only three nationwide studies have demonstrated those health benefits. The WHO can therefore only make a “conditional” rather than “strong” recommendation for issuing this 5% goal for implementation.
A conditional recommendation refers to one that would probably be beneficial if adhered to but where the associated trade-offs between the desirable and undesirable effects still need to be clarified before the recommendation can be adopted as policy.
UK campaigners say it is a "tragedy" that it has taken 10 years for the WHO to think about changing its advice on sugar intake.
“We should aim for 5% if we can,” says Branca.
The update to the WHO guideline is part of the organization’s efforts to improve current dietary guidelines about preventing non-communicable diseases such as diabetes. The guidelines on sugar intake should be used in combination with other nutrition recommendations and goals, particularly those related to the intake of fats and fatty acids such as trans-fat and saturated fat.
Sources:
- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26449497
- http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/sugar-guideline/en/
Related:
Thursday, July 3, 2014
Huckabee's EXCLUSIVE interview with Justina Pelletier who was abducted by Mass DCF
Originally Posted on July 1, 2014 by Marion Algier - Ask Marion
Governor Mike Huckabee played a critical role in getting Justina Pelletier released!
[...]
This arrogant abuse of power (speaking about the IRS in the previous paragraph0 does not end with the federal government. In Massachusetts, teenager Justina Pelletier was taken from her parents’ custody and held virtually incommunicado for over a year, because her parents preferred to continue to have her treated as the physicians at a medical facility associated with Tufts University had treated her, even though shrinks at Children’s Hospital in Boston said her problems were in her head, and took her off some of her medications.
This difference of opinion as to the best medical treatment for Justina Pelletier was enough to get a judge to side with headstrong bureaucrats and override her parents’ rights. So a girl who was ice skating before ended up in a wheelchair under the “care” of shrinks.
Fortunately, enough media attention, especially by former Governor Mike Huckabee on Fox News Channel, finally got this child freed. Perhaps we can hope that all is not lost — yet. But if this case is a symbol of Americans fighting back, it is also a symbol of why it is desperately important to fight back.
That spirit is the best birthday present for America… especially this birthday!
Video: Huckabee’s EXCLUSIVE interview with Justina Pelletier who was abducted by Mass. DCF (6 Mins)
Video: Huckabee’s EXCLUSIVE interview with Justina Pelletier who was abducted by Mass. DCF Part 2 (4:18 Mins)
Video: Huckabee’s EXCLUSIVE interview with Justina Pelletier who was abducted by Mass. DCF Part 3 & 4 (7:24 Mins)
This video includes the Intro, Opening statement and first segment interview – (13:49 Mins) Justina starts at 4:54 Mins
Video: Kidnapping? – Justina Was Held By Mass DCF For 16 Month Over Medical Disagreement – Huckabee
Reference: The making of another Justina?
Monday, June 30, 2014
The Making of Another Justina Pelletier Case?
By: Susan Knowles - Gulag Bound - Cross-Posted at the NoisyRoom![justina-and-dad[1]](http://gulagbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/justina-and-dad1.jpg)
Justina Pelletier was returned to her family in Connecticut after more than 16 months away from them due to being removed by the Department of Children and Families (DCF) in Massachusetts (for more of Justina’s story click here).
What I believe was instrumental in helping to return Justina to her family was her father, Lou Pelletier’s refusal to sit down and shut up, when a gag order was put in place to prevent him from speaking out to the public about his daughter’s plight. I believe that it also helped Justina to have such tremendous public support once the word leaked out that she was being held.
Lou Pelletier first spoke out about Justina’s situation on the Glenn Beck show and from there the family was put in contact with excellent legal counsel, Mat Staver, of Liberty Counsel who represented the family from that point on. Additionally, the local Fox News affiliate in Connecticut, followed the story until the very end when Justina was finally reunited with her loving family.
Additionally, numerous hours were spent by supporters who placed telephone calls to the Governor of Massachusetts, DCF, the judge in the case and just about anyone else who would listen. There were also many who protested in front of the courthouse, DCF’s location, at Boston Children’s Hospital, and a facility in Massachusetts where Justina had been placed. Finally, countless Twitter “firestorms” were held to protest what supporters strongly believed was an injustice that needed to be righted.
Still others, like myself, wrote countless articles and spread the word on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube so that the word about what was happening to Justina under the “care” of DCF might be made known. I also started a Facebook page, called “Stop Government Takeover of Our Children” as a result of my work toward bringing Justina home. My page was created to bring awareness, foster discussion, and to offer solutions toward resolving government overreach pertaining to our kids.
Once people heard about the facts of the Pelletier case, they were convinced that Justina had been unjustly taken from her family and they were determined to see her case through until she was returned to her parents’ custody.
Now there is a new case. It’s not so new really but it has not gained national attention like the Pelletier case.
I’m speaking of the CPS involved case of Dylan Wesolowski. I was recently contacted by Dylan’s mother Monika Wesolowski, after she learned about the articles I had written concerning Justina.
From what I know of Ms. Wesolowski, she is a conservative, a State Department employee with a secret clearance, and her parents emigrated here from Poland.
I’ve just begun to research the facts of this case but I want to present them to you and ask that you do your own research to determine if this family’s dilemma deserves public action, as in Justina’s case.
Here is what I know of the facts. In an April 30, 2014 letter, Wesolowski wrote to Dave Hodges, host of thecommensenseshow.com, for help in getting her son’s story heard.
Wesolowski alleges the following: On December 2013, in Fairfax County, Virginia, police officers dressed in SWAT gear came to her home after there had been a report that she had choked her four year old son, who has Autism, two days prior. Wesolowski accuses Dylan’s father of making this report. According to Ms. Wesolowski, she had gotten sole legal custody of her child approximately 2 months before her encounter with the police and CPS in December 2013.
CPS arrived at the Wesolowski residence about an hour after the police officers’ arrival. The entire meeting lasted from dylan with momapproximately 8:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. During the investigation by the police and CPS, a small red mark was noticed on the back of Dylan’s neck. Dylan was subsequently removed and placed in the temporary custody of Wesolowski’s neighbors.
Following the encounter, Ms. Wesolowski’s neighbors (who had temporary custody) and she, took Dylan to a pediatrician so that the red mark could be diagnosed. The pediatrician’s report, according to Wesolowski, indicates that the red mark was eczema. Wesolowski reportedly has the medical records to prove this fact.
Monika also states in her letter, that once CPS discovered that she had taken her son to the pediatrician, they were very angry, used the report against her claiming that she wanted to cover up the mark with medication, and that she had coerced the doctor into rendering that diagnosis.
Monika further contends that CPS investigated her daycare center alleging that they may have abused her son. She believes these allegations against her daycare center were used as part of a scare tactic.
The case took another turn, when in a separate letter to Dave Hodges, dated May 15, 2014, Wesolowski claims that her parents in Illinois were contacted by the Illinois DCF. She states that they tried to get her parents to sign a document saying that Wesolowski had hurt her son. When her parents refused to sign the document, they were told by someone from DCF in Illinois that Virginia DCF wouldn’t like the fact that they didn’t sign the document. Further, they were allegedly told that since they were on their daughter’s side (evidenced by the fact that they wouldn’t sign the agreement), they had no chance of getting Dylan.
Although, Ms. Wesolowski has never been arrested or charged with any crime, her son was placed in a second foster home with two dads who are gay. Ms. Wesolowski, not only is opposed to the placement of her son in foster care altogether, but believes since she is Roman Catholic, that he should have been placed elsewhere. Supposedly, close friends and family were available and willing to take Dylan into their home.
The case has taken yet another turn. Monika has leveled accusations of possible sexual abuse in this case. She claims in a previous email to Mr. Hodges, that her son is being sexually abused while under the care of Virginia DCF/CPS.
As proof of sexual abuse, Wesolowski claims that she has found “marks” in sensitive areas on Dylan’s body consistent with sexual abuse. In addition, Dylan, now age five, has regressed to defecating in his pants and is back in diapers, according to Wesolowski. She also asserts that Dylan has unexplained fits of temper where he talks about cutting off his hands and the hands of others. She claims that while he is preparing to take a bath, he yells that he “wants to cut his hands off over and over and over prior to the bath.” Dave Hodges, a former mental health professional, is also convinced that these reports are evidence of possible child abuse that are reportable and should be investigated.
Ms. Wesolowski also claims to have photographic evidence of Dylan’s alleged abuse. She contends in an email to Mr. Hodges that Dylan’s dermatitis rash on his back and shoulder were seen for several weeks and were getting progressively work. She described her son as being “skinnier” and that he had lost weight since being placed in foster care. If true, Monika’s allegations of abuse would make any parent cringe. To date, however, Dylan remains in the same foster care environment with the two dads.
As a mental health professional, several things jump out at me as being unusual. First, I have never known CPS to place a child in temporary custody with a neighbor. When there is existing family, barring other factors that wouldn’t be in the child’s best interests, children are placed in foster care with their own relatives. If that is not an option, then there are usually facilities where the child can be taken into the direct care and custody of CPS, at least initially. Why wasn’t that done in this case?
Secondly, any allegations of sexual or physical abuse, if reported must be investigated by CPS. In the Department of Social Services own CPS handbook in Virginia, “What Is Child Protective Services?” CPS has the “responsibility to respond to reports of suspected child abuse or neglect (emphasis added).” Was there a report made of the allegations by anyone? Would CPS have been deemed to have knowledge of suspected child abuse or neglect, if Wesolowski verbally reported her suspicions to them, rather than filing a formal complaint? Did Wesolowski file a formal complaint? If allegations were known by CPS, has an investigation been made, and if so, what was the outcome of the investigation? Undoubtedly, CPS would refrain from responding to that question based upon grounds of confidentiality.
Thirdly, there are a number of foster care homes available in most areas. Should CPS have changed Dylan’s foster care home to avoid potential future allegations being made against CPS or the foster parents as a way of mitigating possible litigation?
Also, if true, why did Illinois DCF become involved in the case when Dylan and his mother live in Virginia? It would be reasonable, if CPS had wanted to place Dylan in a temporary foster home with his grandparents, to have asked Illinois DCF, where the grandparents are located, to check out the their home beforehand to make sure that it was a suitable environment for Dylan. However, according to Ms. Wesolowski, her parents were asked only to sign a document against her.
Dave Hodges believes so much in Dylan’s case that he has set up a gofundme.com account so that Ms. Wesolowski will be able to retain an attorney and try to regain custody of her son. The account indicates a goal of $20,000. Currently, the amount reached is slightly over, $17,000.
If the Justina Pelletier case is any indication of what lies ahead for Monika in her quest to bring Dylan home, then she may be facing a long and arduous battle. Only time will tell if the public will embrace her story and rally around Dylan, as they did for Justina.
——- GB ——-
Susan Calloway Knowles, is a licensed California psychotherapist, former practicing California attorney, author, and political/cultural blogger. Her website is SusanKnowles.com. Susan’s book, a political fiction, is entitled Freedom’s Fight: A Call to Remember and is available on Amazon. Susan can be reached by email at Susan@SusanKnowles.com.
References:
- http://www.dss.virginia.gov/files/division/dfs/cps/intro_page/publications/B032-01-0974-06-eng.pdf
- http://www.gofundme.com/a3s554
- http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/05/17/illinois-and-virginia-cps-conspire-to-steal-and-sex-traffic-children
- http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/06/13/cps-vs-the-preservation-of-the-family-will-you-help
© 2014, Susan Knowles.
Friday, June 13, 2014
Good News for Justina Pelletier: She May Finally Get to Go Home
Some very good news…
Life News: In a dramatic reversal, the Massachusetts’ Department of Children and Families (DCF) has filed a motion with the courts agreeing with our petition to have Justina Pelletier returned home to her family.
The motion for review of reconsideration and dismissal in the case of Justina Pelletier follows Liberty Counsel’s motion to return Justina home which was filed less than two weeks ago. The motion indicates that DCF is in agreement with returning custody of Justina to her parents!
DCF’s concession completely undercuts their argument and reasoning for performing a “parent-ectomy” and removing Justina from the care of the Pelletiers in the first place.
She is now getting treatment from Tuft’s medical providers where she was receiving effective treatments before Boston Children’s Hospital intervened.
The entire process is now waiting on the judge. At this point, there is no reason to delay. There’s no reason why he can’t act immediately!
We have filed a motion asking Judge Joseph Johnston to expedite a ruling since all parties are in agreement. A ruling could come any day now.
Every hour she’s not back with her family is an hour she can’t ever get back. Once she does get home, she’ll have a long road to recovery — physically, mentally and spiritually.
Justina has now lost well over a year of her life with her family. The Pelletiers have spent untold hours and an enormous amount of resources fighting “Goliath” to get their daughter back from the misguided actions of an out-of-control state agency.
Justina has recorded a special video plea to Juvenile Court Judge Johnston and Governor Deval Patrick begging them to allow her to go home.
LifeNews Note: Mat Staver is the Chairman of Liberty Counsel Action and Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel.
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
Did NSA Blackmail Roberts to OK ObamaCare?
Klayman: 'Tyranny is greater today than in 1776'!
U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts may have been blackmailed to approve Obama care after being spied on by the NSA and CIA, says Larry Klayman, the attorney who has come to be known as “the NSA slayer” for his successful legal battles against the National Security Agency.
WND - May 18, 2014 – Cross Posted at AskMarion:
U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts may have been blackmailed to approve Obamacare after being spied on by the NSA and CIA, says Larry Klayman, the attorney who has come to be known as “the NSA slayer” for his successful legal battles against the National Security Agency.
During an appearance Sunday night on Aaron Klein’s New York City radio show on 970 The Answer, Klayman suggested the blackmail possibility when asked by a caller if the Supreme Court could be sued for its approval of the Affordable Care Act.
“Unfortunately, there’s no way to sue the Supreme Court for decisions that it makes. There should be, and there should be a way to remove these justices for making decisions like that,” explained Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch who now heads Freedom Watch.
Chief Justice John Roberts
“But let’s take this possibility: Why did Chief Justice Roberts at the eleventh hour change his decision? He was going to side with the other justices and find that Obamacare was unconstitutional. Is it something that was dug up on him by the NSA or the CIA? Was that used against him to blackmail him?
“These are the kinds of things [the government is doing], and that’s why it’s so scary what’s going on with the NSA and the CIA. It can happen in a democracy. So that may help explain it, and perhaps we can reach these issues through the NSA cases that we brought, the NSA/CIA cases. I intend to get the truth on this.”
Klein himself sounded taken aback by Klayman’s suggestion.
“This is actually a staggering response to believe the government could have spied on a Supreme Court justice … and that information is somehow utilized … against him to pass Obamacare,” Klein said. “This is huge.”
Klayman warned that “every aspect of Americans’ lives is being accessed and monitored by the government.”
“It’s not just telephone metadata that’s being monitored,” he alleged. “They’re also listening to the content, that’s coming out in recent weeks.
“I’m a lawyer. I have an attorney-client privilege, and I can no longer talk to my clients on the telephone and expect that there’s any confidentiality. It changes the whole nature of how you operate.
“We also know that the NSA and CIA – as Communist China, as Russia can do, as any sophisticated country – they can turn your cell phone on anytime and listen to you. And they do.”
Listen to Part 1 of Larry Klayman’s appearance with Aaron Klein HERE
Klayman said such activity is “simply not acceptable in a democracy.”
“And even if they are not accessing our records directly, the fact that the American people know about it, and it’s been documented what’s been going on, it has a chilling effect on our ability to communicate and our ability to criticize the government or take strong action against the government.
“If the government wants to destroy you, it has to access the information that it can use to do it, and that’s why this is so frightening. [It has] a greater capability than King George III had in 1776. The tyranny is greater today than it was at the time of the American Revolution.”
Regarding the status of the legal cases against government spying, Klayman said, “The bottom line is this: Our so-called government is trying to delay final adjudication of the constitutionality of the CIA and NSA’s programs, and as a ruse, President Obama is claiming he wants to make modifications to those programs. They’re not modifications at all.”
Klayman also said it’s not just the Obama administration citizens should be concerned about.
“Can you imagine Hillary Clinton having the power to use this?” he asked.
Listen to Part 2 of Larry Klayman’s appearance with Aaron Klein HERE
No wonder the White House counsel picks show Obama preparing to be impeached…
Related:
Was Justice Roberts Intimidated Into Voting for ‘ObamaCare’? Senator Mike Lee Presents the Evidence
Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare…
Thursday, May 15, 2014
New Placement gives DCF hostage Justina Pelletier more privileges
Justina Pelletier and Her Parents.
CommunitiesDigitalNews: CONNECTICUT, May 14, 2014 — Last Monday, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts moved 15-year old Justina Pelletier across state lines to her new placement at the JRI Susan Wayne Center for Excellence in Thompson, Connecticut. According to the Pelletier family, the move comes as a welcome, but not ideal, change of circumstances for their child, who was removed from their care under highly questionable circumstances last year by the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF). Yesterday, the family emerged hopeful from a meeting with the Wayne Center, after learning that their daughter would have more privileges, education time, and access to her family in the Connecticut facility.
“The people at Susan Wayne were very nice to us and have assured us that Justina will have more time with her family while we wait for her to come home,” says Justina’s older sister Jennifer, age 22. “But it’s still a three hour trip for us to see Justina at her new placement in Connecticut, which is just as far from our house in West Hartford as Justina’s last placement at the Wayside Center in Framingham, Massachusetts.”
At the time Justina was taken into State custody in February 2013, she was also a competitive figure skater. Currently, Justina is wheelchair bound and has lost much of her hair while in State care, going nearly a year without adequate medical treatment for her deadly metabolic disorder at Boston Children’s Hospital’s psychiatric lock down facility. Throughout the process, Jennifer, a West Hartford skating instructor, has been a staunch advocate for her little sister, regularly meeting with State officials and leaders on Justina’s behalf, and only missed one week of visitation.
“Our concerns for Justina’s medical care are still there,” says Jennifer, who questions whether a psychiatric facility is an appropriate placement for a child with such serious medical issues. She points out that the lack of medical specialists working for the Wayne Center means that Justina’s physical therapist will be an outside contractor who is brought in twice per week to work with her sister, which may not be enough.
STATE DOES DAMAGE CONTROL ON DCF BUSINESS MODEL, JUSTINA’S CARE
The bitter custody battle between Justina’s parents and DCF began in February 2013 when the State charged the Pelletiers with medical neglect at the recommendation of Boston Children’s Hospital after Justina’s parents brought her to the ER with flu-like symptoms. At the time, the Tufts Medical Center doctor who had been treating Justina for mitochondrial disease was on vacation, and recommended that she go to BCH and see her regular Tufts specialist who had recently taken a job at BCH. After Justina’s arrival in the ER, BCH failed to review the child’s Tufts medical records, then diagnosed Justina with a controversial psychiatric disorder, cut off her medical treatment, and successfully filed an abuse petition with the State to have her removed from her parent’s custody.
Last winter, Massachusetts legislators prompted action from State actors on Justina’s case when they began asking questions about the seemingly endless flow of taxpayer money being spent by DCF to deprive the child of adequate medical treatment and access to her family, who has been shut out of Justina’s care and relegated to one hour of supervised visitation per week. Eventually, Justina was moved from BCH’s psychiatric lockdown unit to another locked ward the Wayside Youth Center in Framingham, Massachusetts.
In March 2014, Suffolk County Juvenile Court Judge Jeffrey Johnston issued a bitter judgment, permanently making the life long Connecticut resident a ward of the State of Massachusetts due to the inconvenience posed by Connecticut DCF’s refusal to take custody of Justina,and the Pelletiers “uncooperative” and feisty response to the State actors they say are responsible for depriving them of custody and keeping Justina sick for their profit. The judgment also removed BCH from the case and placed Justina under the medical care of Tufts Medical Center, the same provider BCH accused of misdiagnosing Justina and facilitating her parent’s alleged “medical abuse” in the child abuse petition that caused the State to take custody of Justina. By April 2014, Anonymous hacktivists had allegedly become involved in the movement to “free Justina,” launching attacks on Wayside’s and BCH’s websites.
On May 5, 2014, Massachusetts Health and Human Services Secretary John Polanowicz provided the Pelletier’s with a four point reunification plan consistent with Johnston’s decision, then announced plans to move Justina out of the Wayside Youth Center. In order to regain custody of Justina, the modest plan requires the Pelletiers to visit their daughter at the Wayne Center, follow through with the Tufts Medical plan for Justina [that they have no knowledge of or control over], attend family counseling, and meet with DCF.
Jennifer Pelletier says that thus far, the Wayne Center has been accommodating and gracious to the family and will allow them to spend time with their sister on a vastly more generous schedule. The family says they are meeting with DCF officials and the Wayne Center later today to hammer out a visitation schedule and discuss the possibility of allowing Justina to see her friends, who have not been allowed to see her for over a year. Jennifer says the schedule is mainly decided by the Wayne Center, not DCF, and the schedule will likely be decided based on times that do not interfere with Justina’s daily educational and medical care regimens, and could provide for as much as daily visits in the near future.
According to a Massachusetts HHS spokesperson, Judge Johnston’s orders provide for a hearing every six months to review Justina’s progress, meaning that the State could decide to transfer legal custody of Justina to her parents as soon as June 20, 2014.
The Pelletier’s say that while they are hopeful and pleased at Justina’s improved conditions and the State’s progress towards her transition home, they aren’t counting their chickens before they hatch.
“We are happy Justina is in a better place, but we will continue to fight to encourage the State to exercise it’s power to move her home today” says Linda Pelletier, Justina’s mother. “We can’t rest until Justina is home safe with her family where she belongs.”
Jennifer says that whenever Justina asks her why no one is listening to her and why it’s taking so long to bring her home, “I always ask her ‘what do I always say?’ and Justina responds ‘be patient, my big sister will always have my back.’”
Justina Pelletier: Judge Awards 'Permanent Custody' To Mass. DFC
Lou Pelletier, Father of Justina Pelletier on Glenn Beck Program and the Kelly File
The Fascists of Massachusetts… Can what is happening to the Pelletier family happen to you?
Pelletier Family Devastated After Court Hearing On Daughter's Custody
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Justina Pelletier: Judge Awards 'Permanent Custody' To Mass. DFC
Justina Pelletier and Mom
JoshuaPundit: Judge Joseph Johnston has ruled that The Massachusetts Department of Families And Children (DFC) will have 'permanent custody' of 15-year-old Justina Pelletier, taking her away from her parents in spite of her own wishes and her rapidly declining health in state custody.
This case is a textbook example of child abuse promulgated by the legal system and an embedded bureaucracy, and it is worth looking at to see how far out of hand our ruling class has gotten.
Fourteen months ago, Justina, a Connecticut teen was being treated for mitochondrial disease, a group of rare genetic disorders affecting cellular energy production.Her physician who had been treating her, Dr. Mark Korson at Tufts, wanted the girl to visit gastroenterologist Dr. Alejandro Flores at Boston Children's Hospital, who had treated Justina at Tufts in the past. Being loving and concerned parents, the Pelletiers made the appointment with Dr. Flores and duly went to Boston Children's Hospital to have Justina seen.
When they got there, instead of seeing Dr. Flores, Justina was essentially kidnapped. She was taken to emergency where a resident refused to let her see Dr. Flores. Instead, he decided that this was a psychiatric case and sent Justina to a psychologist who diagnosed her with somatoform disorder -- a mental condition in which a patient experiences symptoms that are real but are psychosomatic.
When the Pelletiers rejected the new psychiatric diagnosis and wanted to bring Justina back to Tufts, the hospital first tried to force the girl's parents to sign papers admitting her as a psychiatric patient and when they refused and understandably became insistent at taking their daughter out of Boston Children's, the hospital got the state Department of Family and Children involved and accused the parents of medical child abuse.
They were not permitted to bring Justina home or to another facility. Instead, the teen was kept at Boston Children’s psychiatric ward for nearly a year where her physical condition deteriorated while the parents unsuccessfully fought the system to get Justina released.The DCF has allowed the parents only one hour per week to visit their daughter, but always with DCF personnel present. DCF would not allow the parents to photograph their daughter, and even filed a motion to hold Lou Pelletier in contempt of court for speaking to national media.
"Tufts was working fine with her, diagnosed medically, going to school, ice skating and doing all those things," Lou Pelletier said. "Look at her then and look at her now."
The DCF also has refused to provide the medical care Justina's condition requires, will not allow her access to a priest or to communion (she's Catholic) has refused to make any accommodations for her education, with the result that she is now almost two years behind her classmates in school.
Three weeks ago, Judge Johnston approved a written agreement transferring care back to Tufts Medical Center from Boston Children’s Hospital. That still hasn't been done, as Boston Children's has refused to make any appointments with the doctors there in spite of Justina's condition.
This decision by Judge Johnston was in response to a motion presented by the 15-year-old’s court-appointed lawyer and the lawyers for her parents, Linda and Lou Pelletier. It called for the girl's parents to be awarded “conditional custody” of their daughter.
Instead, the judge has granted permanent custody of Justina Pellatier to the DFC...who have done absolutely nothing to help her.
In his order, Johnston noted that the court considered granting conditional custody to the Pelletiers but “very concerning conduct … does not give this court any confidence they will comply with the conditions of custody.” The evidence? That Lou Pelletier once threatened a DFC social worker, who was afterward removed from the case, and oh yes..the media presence.
“Instead of engaging in quality visits with Justina, the parents use profanity directed at MA DCF personnel in Justina’s presence,” Johnston’s ruling said.
Johnston also included that he thinks Lou and Linda Pelletier should be “psychologically and clinically evaluated,” but refused to have the state of Massachusetts do it, insisiting that it must be coordinated through the State of Connecticut’s own DCF.
You bring your daughter in for medical treatment, she gets kidnapped, you see her dying in front of your eyes and you lose it with some heartless bureaucrat drone who's keeping her prisoner? And when you finally get fed up with doing the dance for months and go to the media to try to shed some sunlight on what's happening to your child, you need to be “psychologically and clinically evaluated?”
To tell you the truth, if the Pellatiers hadn't done that, I'd think they needed to be psychologically evaluated.
This is one of those canary in the coalmine moments. It is the State shoving our noses in the fact that they own our children and they know what's best, and we're just the sperm and egg donors.
What's next? On May 25th, Judge Johnston is expected revisit the decision to award permanent custody in a follow-up court hearing on May 25. His ruling leaves it up to the state DCF to decide whether or when Justina should be returned to her family, which means she could end up in state care until she turns 18. If she survives.
Meanwhile, the Pelltiers haven't given up. They're appealing the decision and have filed a writ of habeus corpus against Massachusetts for wrongful imprisonment. Hopefully this will get Justina freed by order of the Appellate courts, although it might just be that the attention this is generating could get Justina Pellatier freed sooner..perhaps at the review hearing in May.
Related:
Lou Pelletier, Father of Justina Pelletier on Glenn Beck Program and the Kelly File
The Fascists of Massachusetts… Can what is happening to the Pelletier family happen to you?
Pelletier Family Devastated After Court Hearing On Daughter's Custody
Thursday, March 20, 2014
My Wife's Last Days -- And the Coming ObamaCare Death Panel
By Stuart Schwartz – American Thinker: We have been so absorbed by the cavalcade of government incompetence and individual hurt produced by the rollout of ObamaCare that it is easy to forget the tragedy-in-waiting should this federal healthcare takeover stay in place: the death panel, also known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). This is the group of political appointees designed to allow the federal government to use a combination of medical and social criteria to determine the healthcare an individual receives.
Or, to put it as bluntly as Sarah Palin did, to determine who lives and who dies. Why am I thinking about that now? Because my wife and soul-mate of 33 years, Sharon Harrah Schwartz, died at the age of 62 in January. Her passing put an end to a slow-motion death from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, ALS, popularly known as Lou Gehrig’s disease. She would have occupied the bottom portion of an IPAB treatment list.
Her suffering and passing was and remains wrenching for her family and friends. It was especially difficult over the last year as her illness accelerated, destroying her muscles and, consequently, her ability to speak, to eat, and ultimately to breathe. A variety of drugs and equipment kept her reasonably comfortable, while medical technology helped clear the fluids collecting in her lungs. She enjoyed, as much as possible, the last months with her family. An advanced directive, worked out in concert with ALS healthcare professionals, proscribed the treatment limits. For almost two years, her healthcare relied on a myriad of individual decisions based on relationships with both the ones she loved and with healthcare providers. The most significant one: she and I -- lovers and best friends for more than three decades -- had decided together that, barring a miracle and/or last-minute medical research breakthrough, we would allow the disease to take its course, keep her as comfortable as possible, and let God do the rest.
This illustrates something that President Obama and his party, in its zeal to use healthcare as a driving force in transforming American society, accrue power, and expand centralized government, have ignored: that the foundation of what has become the uniquely American and consequently world-class healthcare system is individual decision-making and values, resting upon a multitude of relationships that work best when left to those with a stake in it -- healthcare professionals, patients and their families. The government has a role, yes; but its role should be limited, allowing the marketplace of providers and patients to work.
At its most basic level, healthcare is individual and personal, depending upon relationships and particular values. Our faith, our love for each other and belief in the sacred responsibility of marriage underlaysleepless nights, caring for her when she could no longer care for herself, servicing the machines that alleviated some of the symptoms, the decisions that allowed just a few more months to live and love with her family and friends.
Her… our struggles with this terminal disease -- she referred to it as the “beast” in her body -- illustrate the government-sponsored agony awaiting so many families just over the horizon. Love informed our decisions in consultation with those providing treatment. I valued her life as sacred and God-given, acknowledging the debt I owed to someone who had joyfully served as wife, mother, and friend.
But looming on the horizon is a whole other set of criteria. ObamaCare has established an agenda-driven political board that will shift the loci of healthcare decisions from individual and relationship to the application of social justice concepts. Even a cursory reading (something that few, if any, of the Democrats foisting this law upon us took the time to do) of the pages and footnotes of this intrusion and the writings of its designers -- many so-called medical policy experts from academia -- makes it clear that progressive social engineering by government-appointed experts will largely determine medical treatment.
Peruse the publications and reports of the thinking of the architects of ObamaCare. Their various scoring systems, their social priorities would have put my wife at the bottom of the list for treatment. Obamacare architects perceive healthcare, as they do income, as a zero-sum game -- every dollar spent on her treatment is a dollar taken away from someone else. Never mind that this notion, like so much of ObamaCare, is a deliberate lie with no foundation in fact; healthcare, like wealth, in the United States has expanded as new medical technologies, techniques and research have brought ever more accessible and better care.
But centralized control needs to declare medical resources finite, which in turn demands rationing, and rationing needs, of course, a government board to decide who gets treatment and when, who gets to live… and die. My wife, under a fully implemented ObamaCare, would have been among the last in line for treatment. She was a retiree (too old!) with a terminal disease (too expensive with a limited future!), a woman who had chosen to spend most of her adult life raising children (that’s not really societally valued employment, the architects might sniff) and who lived simply and lovingly, taking pride in her family and her role as a homemaker (what --no greater ambitions?)
Sharon was loved by her family, her friends and, above all, by God. We devoted a considerable portion of our energy and resources to making sure she felt loved during her last year. We could do no less, as love is a basic tenet of our faith, a Christianity that says her worth depends solely on her standing as a creation of God -- not a federal bureaucracy. Such was the sanctity of Sharon’s life, a human life. That is the opposite of Obamacare which, if fully implemented, would likely have robbed us of much of her past year. To a centralized and progressive federal bureaucracy, Sharon’s worth was the totality of the probabilities of her contribution to the good of a theoretical community, as defined by Washington politicians and technocrats.
But for us, it was much simpler: She was God’s gift, to whom we owed our love and resources and energy until she passed from life in this world.
It is time to repeal Obamacare.
Dr. Stuart Schwartz is on the faculty of Liberty University and has been a frequent contributor to American Thinker. His wife, Sharon, passed away on January 7 at their residence in Lynchburg, Virginia.
Sunday, February 23, 2014
More Black Babies Aborted Than Born in NYC
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH/EIB: If I may get solemn and serious, as this requires, there is shocking news out of New York. I don't know how shocking it is, but it's really bad, and it's Cybercast news service, but the actual source of this is the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. So this is a city source: "In 2012, there were more black babies killed by abortion (31,328) in New York City than were born there (24,758)..."
So out of a possible 56,000 black babies in New York City in 2012, 31,000 were aborted and 25,000 were killed, "and the black children killed comprised 42.4% of the total number of abortions in" New York City. This is shocking. Let me run these numbers by you again, because I know they're tough to follow on radio and I screwed up the addition. So there were, give or take, 56,000 black pregnancies in New York City 2012.
And 31,000 of the 56,000 were aborted and 25,000 were born. The 31,000 aborted was almost 50% of the total number of abortions, but the African-American population is only, what, 11 to 13%. These are striking numbers, and this is... Dare I go there? Yes, I do. This is exactly what Margaret Sanger had in mind when she came up with the whole notion of Planned Parenthood and eugenics.
I've always been amazed that the white, liberal elite champion Margaret Sanger, when it wouldn't take anything for Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons to go back and figure out who she is what she really wanted. How in the world there's any support for whatever Margaret Sanger attached her name to is beyond my ability to comprehend. Well, no it's not, because I know the left. Abortion is the sacrament to them. But this is just...
These people that are relying on the Democrat Party to protect them to take care of them, to guard them against whatever extremism might be coming their way from conservative Republicans, are wiping themselves out -- with the support of and the recommendation of the Democrat Party -- which puts abortion in top two of the most important issues going. It's just amazing here, and when you look at the reality of this and then you understand who it is they blame for their lot in life and their plight?
"The report is entitled, Summary of Vital Statistics 2012 The City of New York, Pregnancy Outcomes, and was prepared by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Office of Vital Statistics." Now, you'd have to say this is shocking news, and you've got Democrat Party advocacy behind it. You've got Democrat Party identity behind it -- and if you'd add all the other abortions that Democrats are having, you may have a little bit better understanding of why they're so eager for amnesty, and you might understand why the US birth rate is now dipping below replacement levels, which has all kinds of bad connotations to it, not the least of which are economic.
END TRANSCRIPT
CNSNews: NYC: More Black Babies Killed by Abortion Than Born
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Lou Pelletier, Father of Justina Pelletier on Glenn Beck Program and the Kelly File
This is what happens when the government makes decisions for you and your children’s healthcare… just wait until ObamaCare is in full force…
Glenn talks to the father of 15-year-old Justina Pelletier who has been held against her parents' will for over a year.
Video: Lou Pelletier, father of Justina Pelletier | Glenn Beck Program
Megyn Kelly interview Lou Pelletier, father of Justina pelletier. Lou Pelletier talks about losing custody of his daughter Justina Pelletier over medical issues. The Kelly File
Video: Lou Pelletier The Kelly File Interview On Losing Custody Of Daughter Justina Over Medical Issues
Video: Boston Children's Hospital Takes Sick Child From Parents (11.27.13)
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Dr. Ben Carson, family and friends target of IRS harassment for criticizing Obama
We knew this was coming…
Examiner.com: February 11, 2014
On Monday, Dr. Benjamin Carson, the former director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, said he and his family were targeted by the IRS in retribution for comments critical of Barack Obama, Newsmax reported.
According to Carson, audits and other harassment began in May or June of 2013, just a few months after his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. Gradually, he added, the harassment expanded to include family members, associates, and his charitable endeavors.
"I’ve been quite -- I would say astonished at the level of hostility that I have encountered," he told Newsmax TV's John Bachman.
"The IRS has investigated me. They said, ‘I want to look at your real estate holdings.’ There was nothing there. ‘Well, let’s expand to an entire [year], everything.’ There was nothing there. ‘Let’s do another year.’ Finally, after a few months, they went away. But they’ve come after my family, they’ve come after my friends, they’ve come after associates," he added.
Until now, Newsmax said, Dr. Carson has shied away from tying the IRS actions to his criticism of Obama, but now he says Americans live "in a Gestapo age" even though they may not realize it.
He also said Congress has to step up to the plate and do its job.
"The reason we have divided government is if one branch of the government gets out of control, starts thinking they’re too big for their britches, you need to be able to have control," he said.
Unfortunately, Congress as a whole has shown little interest in keeping the administration in check, but a handful of conservative Republicans have spoken out.
Carson told Newsmax this is the first time he's ever been audited by the IRS.
He also said the agency has targeted his children, but didn't go into much detail, expressing concern the agency would expand their probe even further.
Newsmax added:
He also said a charitable organization that aids inmates’ children was informed last year, for the first time in recent years, that they would no longer be receiving a $1 million annual grant from the Justice Department.
"This is solely because you were involved?" Bachman asked.
"Correct," Carson said.
He also told Newsmax these acts of retribution take place because Americans refuse to take action.
"We sit there and we say, ‘Oh this is horrible.’ But we don’t do anything. And see, that’s what I’m trying to get our congressional people, our lawmakers – they’ve got to get courage," he said. "Because why would anybody who has an agenda to fundamentally change this nation, why would they stop if no one is opposing them?"
Carson also believes the retribution will continue, but promises he will not be forced into silence.
"The only reason that I haven’t shut up is because in Romans 8 it says ‘If God be for you, who can be against you?’ And I believe in that protection that God gives you," he added.
Carson's experience is "not that different from what many others are experiencing," said GOP lawyer Cleta Mitchell. "It’s quite, quite troublesome and disturbing."
"I have heard this same story over and over and over throughout the last year," she said. "I cannot tell you how many donors to conservative organizations, people who have become active, have said ‘I was never audited until I started giving money to X conservative candidate or cause.’"
Acording to Mitchell, the targeting includes donors to candidates like Mitt Romney and Rick Perry and donors to conservative issue groups.
The IRS has not just limited itself to targeting conservative donors, Tea Party groups or well-known conservatives.
As we reported last November, a cancer patient critical of Obamacare was targeted by the IRS.
Lawmakers have also threatened to unleash the IRS on the NFL over the Washington Redskins team name and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., suggested President Obama use the IRS to silence the Tea Party.
Mitchell said the situation is "pretty scary because the people who are supposed to be the neutral arbiter and law enforcement officials appear to me to be completely in the bag for the administration."
Related:
- Dr. Ben Carson Becomes Chairman of Save Our Healthcare
- Report: Cancer patient critical of Obamacare targeted by IRS for audit
- Dem. Sen. Chuck Schumer: Obama should use IRS to curtail Tea Party
- Jay Carney to Piers Morgan: Scandals involving IRS, Benghazi, AP 'don't exist'
Saturday, January 4, 2014
Eleven AGs slam Obama's healthcare fixes; Greg Abbot says Obama is acting like a king
Greta with Texas Attorney General Abbot:
Video: Eleven AGs slam Obama's healthcare fixes; Greg Abbot says Obama is acting like a king
Published on Jan 2, 2014
Eleven attorneys general slammed Obama, saying that he is breaking the law by repeatedly making changes to Obamacare without going through Congress. The AGs specifically criticize President Obama's executive action that allowed insurance companies to keep offering health plans that had been canceled for not meeting ObamaCare's more rigorous standards.
"We support allowing citizens to keep their health insurance coverage, but the only way to fix this problem-ridden law is to enact changes lawfully: through Congressional action," the attorneys general wrote in a letter to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. "The illegal actions by this administration must stop." They say the healthcare fix was "flatly illegal under federal constitutional and statutory law."
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey wrote the letter, which was signed by his counterparts in Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia.
Signatories include Gregg Abbott of Texas — who's running for governor this year — and Ken Cuccinelli of Virginia.
James D. "Buddy" Caldwell of Louisiana was previously a member of the Democratic Party, but switched to the GOP in 2011.
The change, the Republican attorney generals argue, exceeds precedents set by Supreme Court decisions.
The officials point to the 1985 Heckler v. Chaney case, in which the Supreme Court concluded that some enforcement actions of laws might be subject to judicial review first.
Friday, December 27, 2013
Time to Stock Up on Incandescent Bulbs Before They Go Out Permanently
If your New Year’s resolution is to change your light bulbs, don’t worry — the federal government’s here to help.
Beginning January 1, 2014, the federal government will ban the use of 60-watt and 40-watt incandescent light bulbs. The light bulb has become a symbol in the fight for consumer freedom and against unnecessary governmental interference into the lives of the American people.
In 2007, Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law an energy bill that placed stringent efficiency requirements on ordinary incandescent bulbs in an attempt to have them completely eliminated by 2014. The law phased out 100-watt and 75-watt incandescent bulbs last year.
Proponents of government-imposed efficiency standards and regulations will say, “So what? There are still plenty of lighting options on the shelves at Home Depot; we’re saving families money; and we’re reducing harmful climate change emissions.”
The “so what” is that the federal government is taking decisions out of the hands of families and businesses, destroying jobs, and restricting consumer choice in the market. We all have a wide variety of preferences regarding light bulbs. It is not the role of the federal government to override those preferences with what it believes is in our best interest.
Families understand how energy costs impact their lives and make decisions accordingly. Energy efficiency has improved dramatically over the past six decades — long before any national energy efficiency mandates.
If families and firms are not buying the most energy-efficient appliance or technology, it is not that they are acting irrationally; they simply have budget constraints or other preferences such as comfort, convenience, and product quality. A family may know that buying an energy-efficient product will save them money in the long term, but they have to prioritize their short-term expenses. Those families operating from paycheck to paycheck may want to opt for a cheaper light bulb and more food instead of a more expensive light bulb and less food.
Some may read this and think: Chill out—it’s just a light bulb. But it’s not just a light bulb. Take a look at the Department of Energy’s Federal Energy Management Program. Basically anything that uses electricity or water in your home or business is subject to an efficiency regulation.
When the market drives energy efficiency, it saves consumers money. The more the federal government takes away decisions that are better left to businesses and families, the worse off we’re going to be.
Why do you think they call him "kill"-o-watt
All our lives, we had fluorescent in school, at work and in many public places. No one said boo. All of a sudden, people are throwing up, have headaches....etc etc because of the mercury contaminated curly craps. So, we are saving money and we’re reducing harmful climate change emissions? But the new bulbs are making us sick and contain mercury? So what is wrong with that picture?
There are some alternatives:
A Manufacturer Found a Loophole Around That Incandescent Light Bulb Ban
Home Depot’s Cree 60W Equivalent Soft White (2700K) A19 Dimmable LED Light Bulb
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Fascist Bloomberg Pushes For Mandatory Flu Vaccines for Children
By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton – the NoisyRoom – Cross-Posted at AskMarion
Looks like fascist Nanny Bloomberg intends to make good use of his final three weeks in office. For those of you hoping that Comrade de Blasio will reverse this or somehow be better, take your medication and get over it. Not. Gonna. Happen. Bloomberg wasn’t content with taking away salt, soft drinks or Styrofoam… He’s not content with $102 tolls to bring a delivery truck into New York or telling you that you can’t smoke… He’s not content with taxing and regulating the hell out of New Yorkers, or with claiming he knows better than the stupid riffraff that elected him… Oh no. Now he is mandating that our children get a yearly flu shot. If you love your family, get the hell out of New York. Under de Blasio this will seem like a walk in Gorky Park:
On Wednesday, with just three weeks to go until he leaves office, Mr. Bloomberg’s controversial Board of Health is set to vote on new rules that would force children as young as six months old to be immunized each year before December 31 if they attend licensed day care or pre-school programs.
“Young children have a high risk of developing severe complications from influenza. One-third of children under five in New York City do not receive an annual influenza vaccination, even though the vaccine safely and effectively protects them against influenza illness,” the Health Department said in a statement. “This mandate will help protect the health of young children, while reducing the spread of influenza in New York City.”
[…]
According to a Board of Health notice made public in September, influenza results in 20,000 hospitalizations and 30 to 150 deaths in children under 5 nation-wide each year.
Under the proposed rule, which had a public hearing in October, the vaccinations would be required “unless the vaccine may be detrimental to the child’s health, as certified by a physician licensed to practice medicine in this state, or the parent, parents, or guardian of a child hold genuine and sincere religious beliefs which are contrary to the practices herein required.”
One wonders why the jackbooted thuggery of enforcing flu shots in children? Surely there is nothing nefarious going on there, right? Did an outbreak of killer swine flu happen that I didn’t hear about? Is The Stand about to play out tomorrow? If so, Bloomberg should get the Walking Dude’s part down pat. And there’s more to this – he is pushing for a registry of certain individuals who have been admitted for mental evaluation or treatment:
With the clock running out on its final term, the Bloomberg administration is pushing two assertive new mandates through the city’s Board of Health.
The city Department of Health wants to require all children under age 5 in city-licensed day care programs receive annual flu vaccinations. And in a move with heightened relevance following the Washington Navy Yard massacre, the city is calling on hospitals to report personal details on patients admitted for psychosis to the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
Both items are on the agenda for the next Board of Health meeting, on October 22.
The proposed rules follow the administration’s so-far thwarted effort to impose a ban on supersize sodas and other sugary drinks, which judges have ruled overreached the board’s powers. The members of the board are appointed by the mayor.
Under the new proposals, hospitals in the city would have to promptly report the identities of patients between the ages of 18 and 30 admitted for psychotic incidents. The city health agency intends to follow up with the patients to ensure they receive further treatment. Currently, fewer than half actually get such care.
“Without follow-up treatment, more than one quarter of these individuals will be expected to relapse and to be rehospitalized within one year,” the Department of Health explains in its plan. “Early, high-quality treatment can reduce the risk of relapse and increase chances for long-term remission.”
The department promises that the personal information collected – to include the patient’s name, age, gender, address, telephone number, insurance type and diagnosis – would be destroyed within 30 days. The remaining data would be made available for epidemiological studies.
A Department of Health spokesperson was not available for comment.
The collection of personal data on people with high risk of paranoia raises a red flag for Mark Heyrman, who teaches mental health law at the University of Chicago Law School.
“The more we say we will be collecting data on people who have mental illnesses, the more likely it is that mentally ill people will think that the information might eventually be used against them in some way,” said Heyrman. “The question is whether there will be enough positive effects to outweigh the fact that, as our friend Edward Snowden has shown us, our government is not particularly good at protecting its own privacy efforts.”
Hmmm. Considering gun confiscations have already begun in New York, you can add these individuals to the list of the ones who have their arms taken away. Screw the Constitution – screw the Second Amendment. The Politburo has spoken.
Many parents object to flu shots. There are suspicions that they are connected to autism. Some have life-threatening allergic reactions to them and other negative side affects. Some children die from them. According to a Board of Health notice made public in September, influenza results in 20,000 hospitalizations and 30 to 150 deaths in children under 5 nation-wide each year. But how many wind up in the hospital, ill or dead because of the shots?
Myself, I don’t take flu shots. For me, when I do, it causes me to get the flu or pneumonia. Some will say that is ridiculous. I don’t – it has happened to me every time. They can stuff their flu shots.
We were not mandated when we were kids to get all these shots. Now, if you don’t immunize your children for everything mandated, they kick them out of daycare or school altogether. The State is now basically telling you that your children belong to them. They may go home to you at night, but they are on loan and Big Brother is watching.
The flu is serious. It can kill you and does kill many people each year. There is no cure and no sure way to prevent it, except to stay healthy and when you get the flu to take care of yourself and go to a doctor if need be. Good luck with that under Obamacare. And here’s the dirty little secret the government isn’t telling you. Even if you get immunized, if a killer flu strain mutates into existence, chances are your shot will do nothing for it. So, why the big push?
Parents should be the final arbiter of whether their children get immunized for the flu or not. I expect Bloomberg to shove through more fascist crap before he exits stage left (and I do mean Left). Look for de Blasio to kick the Marxism into high gear and to radically increase such fascist moves as mandatory flu vaccines for children and lists for those who have received mental assistance. What do you expect from a Communist? Well done, New York. Bloomberg and de Blasio – fascists of a red feather, in lockstep together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)