GESTIÓN EN SALUD PÚBLICA: Michigan mother jailed for refusing to vaccinate child

domingo, 15 de octubre de 2017

Michigan mother jailed for refusing to vaccinate child

Michigan mother jailed for refusing to vaccinate child

Bioedge

Michigan mother jailed for refusing to vaccinate child

by Xavier Symons | 14 Oct 2017 |

A 40-year-old Michigan woman has been sentenced to seven days jail after disobeying a court order to have her son vaccinated.

Rebecca Bredow, who describes herself as an “educated vaccine-choice mother”, was ordered by Oakland County Circuit Judge Karen McDonald in late September to have her child immunised; she had been taken to court by her ex-husband and the child’s father, James Horne, who told the court that Bredow had reneged on a previous agreement to have the child vaccinated.

Bredow deliberately ignored Judge McDonald’s order to have the child immunised, and was soon back in the County courthouse declaring that, "I would rather sit behind bars standing up for what I believe in, than giving in to something I strongly don't believe in”.

Judge McDonald ordered that parents be given equal custody of the child, and that the boy should be vaccinated while Bredow was in jail.

Bredow has since served her short sentence (she was released after five days, under special Oakland Country Jail rules). “It was the worst five days of my life pretty much,” she told reporters on Wednesday, “except for the fact that I just found out that he was vaccinated and I'm not going to get him back today.”

The Bredow case is the latest of a string of high-profile anti-vaxxer cases in America that have resulted in strong punitive measures against objecting parents.

Saturday, October 14, 2017

During his campaign, President Trump promised pro-life voters that he would support their agenda. And he has delivered. He reinstated the Mexico City policy; he has cut funding to Planned Parenthood; he has rolledl back Obamacare's birth control mandate. And now a new strategic plan for the Department of Health and Human Services has definitely taken a pro-life turn, with references to protecting life from conception to natural death. "We are on track to seeing the most pro-life president this country has ever seen," says Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council.

Not everyone is happy about this. “This is a license to discriminate,” Susan Berke Fogel, director of reproductive health at the National Health Law Program, told Politico. “All of that language brings back all of these things that we’ve seen in the past that are just incongruous with really protecting health care and really improving people’s lives.”

What do you think?