Q & A Cont. With Alan Philips Esq. #Vaccines #Mandated Vaccines #Vaccine Exemptions

Very fascinating material today and all week.  Thank you Mr. Phillips for your time in this area.  What a great value this has been to all of us.  We look forward to your future Q & A participation.

Q:   Can you complete waivers if you want to pick and choose which vaccinations your pet undergoes?

Illinois

A:  About a dozen states have medical exemptions for dogs, but that’s it. Pets don’t have religious beliefs, and they are considered “chattel”—property—under the law, for the most part. But first, determine what vaccines are required by law and which ones are merely recommended (for your veterinarian’s and big pharma’s financial gain). Beyond that, it’s probably up to a vet to decide, though the option to pick and choose could vary from state to state depending on the specific wording of each state’s laws.

   Very few states allow “pick and choose” for school exemptions. While such an option might be inferred in any state with a philosophical exemption, if it’s not clearly spelled out, you can’t necessarily make the assumption that it’s a legal option. Similarly, delayed vaccines, even where supported by a doctor, may not be a legal option. Remember—we don’t get to decide how to interpret the law—that’s the job of the courts. So, if you’re not sure about the interpretation of your state’s law, consider consulting an attorney about the matter. Every state has “statutory construction” rules or laws that explain how to interpret each state’s statutes. Legally, either those rules and/or legal precedent will answer the question; and if there is a formal dispute, then a judge may ultimately have to decide.

   I really like what Colorado has, a form that allows you to check exactly which vaccines you are refusing, and to indicate whether or not the refusal is for religious or philosophical reasons. You can’t get much more flexible than that! Odd, though, that Colorado state law also requires healthcare workers to get flu vaccines and offers *no* exemption option for that. There is a right to refuse for religious reasons, however, under federal civil rights law.

Q:   How is the vaccine court different from other U.S. courts?

A:   The “vaccine courts” are a division of the Court of Federal Claims that address only vaccine injury compensation claims, and nothing else. They have “special masters” instead of judges, and have their own unique procedural rules. They are the only option vaccine victims have for any kind of compensation for their injury, or their families for their death when a vaccines kills someone. At last check, only about 26% of applicants get compensated. The system was created by the National Childhood Injury Compensation Act of 1986, and supposedly to make it easier for vaccine victims to get compensation, but in practice it has become harder and harder to get compensation, and instead of being much quicker than state courts, it can take much longer, from what I’ve heard. Still, the system pays out $100 million annually, and this is despite the fact that the FDA and CDC say that only 1 – 10% of serious adverse events ever get reported in the first place. So, the system is, at least in the minds of vaccine injury advocates, in dire need of revision. A recent hearing to review the problems was postponed…

   Payouts from this system are posted on the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s (VICP’s) website: http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html (go to data and statistics, link on the left)


Alan Phillips, Esq.
Attorney and Counselor at Law
Asheville, NC 828-575-2622
attorney@vaccinerights.com

Please share:
Vax Radio Show, Mon Nite 9 pm ET: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/knowyourrightshour
Vaccine Exemption E-book: http://www.vaccinerights.com/e-book.html

The Buddha stated: “Three things cannot be long hidden: The sun, the moon, and the truth.” We go forward not dissuaded by the odds against us, but rather, confident in the knowledge that complete transparency is, necessarily, the eventual outcome.

TRUTH IN SCIENCE, TRUE SCIENCE IN LAW

Link

Beyond Conformity #MMR #Vaccines #Merck

Merck’s illegal MMR smokescreen continues

Hilary Butler – Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Question: When is a legal case really newsworthy?

Answer: When it’s never covered by the mainstream media. Yet the on-going Merck MMR case – which no-one is being told about – is even more important than VIOXX was.

I wonder how Merck has managed to so skillfully keep it out of mainstream media….

So let’s update the news, …. that isn’t being told.

An article planted recently in the pro-corporate website Law360 says pretty much what Merck’s lawyers wanted it to say.  Naturally, it was ignored by mainstream media. It said:

Click on above link to read more.

Related Articles:

 

Merck’s MMR murk – where to from here?

http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/hilarys-desk/mercks-mmr-murk-where-to-from-here

Merck’s next problem – Japan

http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/hilarys-desk/mercks-next-problem-japan