i hear you, you are expected to do an unrealistic amount of work. i believe you, data does not support a delayed schedule for most.

i continue to support the need to obtain patient consent to protect bodily autonomy.

i am not foolish enough to believe i have an easy solution to the difficulties inherent in that conflict given the shortcomings of healthcare systems.

the letter doesn't say, and the reporter may or may not have had good reason. we don't know based on the information provided.

the fact that a report was made does not inherently mean that abuse or neglect was taking place, only that someone reported concern. the fact that the report is being investigated does not mean that abuse or neglect was taking place, only that someone with CPS agreed to open a case based on what they were told.

i could call CPS and say that you are abusing a child or other vulnerable person, provide enough information about you and a plausible concern (in theory at least, whether it's based in fact or not), and CPS could choose to follow up on that report. i can make this report and they can investigate regardless of whether there is any actual evidence of abuse or neglect.

let me preface my statement by clarifying i am definitely NOT anti-vax. and like the poster you are addressing, i agree that the needs of people in public education/care settings are important and it is good to require vaccination for participation.

to me, where a parent has concerns about the pace of vaccinations, a medical provider can share information with that person to help them better understand the risks and benefits of the typical schedule (as you have done). they should still have the opportunity to consent.

medical care without consent is a violation of bodily autonomy.

edit - i wonder if i was downvoted for a) i endorse vaccination as a benefit to the public, b) i think education is valuable in addressing fear or conspiratorial thinking, or c) i believe people have a right to bodily autonomy.

or was it d) i expressed these things instead of dogpiling the sovcit? 🤔

children are not property, but consent is also important.

i wouldn't assume the best of CPS. in my work, i see many families who are dealing with CPS, and it is often an unjust shitshow for families.

the notion that an agency should exist to protect the interests of vulnerable people is obviously a good one. in practice, many workers are undereducated, overworked, often lacking professionalism, and empowered by the state to enact bias against families and family members who may also be vulnerable.

cps, unfortunately, should be viewed in context of our country's history of criminalizing and victimizing minorities (people of color, people experiencing poverty, women and sexual minorities). they do some good work. they also hurt a lot of people they should not, including children.

this parent did not find it weird to be asked, because that's what they wanted. they requested that staff seek their consent before providing care.

i don't think the parent denied testing. when asked, they consented.

edit "when they asked me, i gave them permission."

it looks like this person wanted to be consulted before any care/treatment was provided to their children. when asked, they agreed to suggested care.

it looks like there is an error in their post. i do not read their statement to mean they accepted care for their own self and not for their children.

well, that escalated quickly

i'm not usually "both sides," but i think some Dems voted for this as well

Ken M! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_M

Ken M, is that you? (i hope so!)