Child Care Payments Bill 1997: Urgent Action Needed to Stop This Threat to Our Freedom by Meryl Dorey I am writing to you all about something that is more important than anything that has happened in this area - at least since I've been involved in vaccination. It is the Child Care Payments Bill 1997 which has just passed through the house of representatives unopposed and is now in committee. It will got through the Senate unopposed and pass into law if we do not do anything RIGHT NOW! I cannot emphasise enough the threat to our freedom from this bill. This not only defines what immunisation is as only being vaccinated (meaning that even if you have had the disease you are not immunised and, according to this bill, you must still be vaccinated!), but it has a description of conscientious objection that is so open to interpretation, it may be almost impossible for anyone to register as a conscientious objector. I have cut and pasted the relevant sections from the bill and if anyone would like to see the whole 251 pages of it, you can at www.aph.gov.au - then press on the link for bills and scroll down to child care payments bill 1997. You will need adobe acrobat to see it which you can get for free on the internet. I have put my comments in brackets and highlighted them in blue - I hope all your email programmes can cope with colour? We need to get together information for ammendments and we need the support of senators around Australia. Surely, even pro-vaccination senators should be able to see that what we are asking for is not unreasonable? Those of you who care about your rights and the rights of your children will get involved in this today. We must have our lobbying in place by Monday or Tuesday of next week at the latest. This bill will be before the Senate by the end of next week or beginning of the week after so if we miss our opportunity, it will never come again. The Americans never had a chance to say no to compulsory vaccination - it happened in 1978 and the consciousness level regarding the dangers of vaccines was very low. NO, this bill does not make vaccination compulsory, but it makes it very easy for the government to separate the vaccinators from the non-vaccinators. It establishes a precedent which must be unconstitutional of financially penalising those who have chosen not to vaccinate and it will make it very simple in the future to further penalise this group because all of our information from the medicare database (where the Australian Childhood Immunisation Regsiter is held) will now be linked to the Department of Social Security. Today, they are trying to take away our child care allowance and maternity allowance - tomorrow, it may be the dole and the family allowance. We have a unique opportunity here of having an established lobby group with a large and diverse membership. Forward this message to anyone and everyone who you feel can help, get involved, contact me either by email, phone or fax (the numbers are in my signature) and please, please, please do it NOW! Thank you, Meryl 17/10/97 Re - Child Care Payments Bill 1997-10-17 A Bill for an Act to provide for payments in respect of child care, and for related purposes. Preliminary matters and interpretation - Chapter 1 Interpretation Part 2 Immunised, in relation to a child, means the child has received vaccinations that a child of that age ought to have received under the latest edition of the Standard Vaccination Schedule published by the National Health and Medical Research Council. [This makes no allowance for natural immunity - it means that children who are simply vaccinated are considered to be immune, despite the masses of evidence that say otherwise; and that children who have contracted and recovered from these diseases are considered to still be susceptible to them, despite evidence to the contrary.] Preliminary matters and interpretation - Chapter 1 Interpretation Part 2 8 Meaning of conscientious objection A person has a conscientious objection to a child being immunised if: a) The person's objection is based on a belief involving a fundamental conviction that immunisation should not take place; and b) The conviction is so compelling that the person has to refuse to allow the child to be immunised. [Allowing oneself to be registered as a conscientious objector could possibly mean that in the future, the government can impose even more penalties upon us. This is what has happened in other countries including the US. In addition, how are we to convince someone that our conviction is so compelling that we have to refuse to allow our child to be immunised? This should simply read that a conscientious objector is someone who has a personal, philosophical, religious, medical or conscientious objection to vaccination. We should not have to prove anything to anyone.] Child care assistance - Chapter 2 Qualification Part 2 22 The immunisation requirement - prospective claimants and recipients (1) If: a) A person is given a notice under subsection 43 (1) relating to the immunisation of a child under 7 in respect of whom the person has made a prospective claim for child care assistance; or b) A person is given a notice under subsection 70 (1) relating to the immunisation of a child under 7 in respect of whom the person is receiving child care assistance; The person is not qualified to receive child care assistance in respect of a session of care for the child that occurs after the end of the period of 28 days after the notice is given, unless, at the end of that period, the Secretary is satisfied that: c) The child is immunised; or d) Both of the following have occurred: I. A recognised immunisation provider has certified in writing that he or she has discussed with the person the benefits and risks of immunising the child; [I would like this section to read that a medical professional has certified in writing that he or she has discussed with the person the benefits and risks of immunising the child being guided by the principles in the High Court decision of Rogers vs. Whitaker - that they have been informed of all side effects of a material nature - those that are common even though the detriment may be slight - and those that are rare when the detriment is severe. I would also like it to be legislated that they have been shown a copy of the package insert that comes along with the vaccine. II. The person has declared in writing that he or she has a conscientious objection to the child being immunised; or [We must find out if this is an either or - if the person has declared in writing that he or she has a conscientious objection to the child being immunised, do they still have to see a doctor for counselling?] e) If the child is a dependent child of another person, both of the following have occurred: I. A recognised immunisation provider has certified in writing that he or she has discussed with the other person the benefits and risks of immunising the child; II. The other person has declared in writing that he or she has a conscientious objection to the child being immunised; or f) A recognised immunisation provider has certified in writing that the immunisation of the child would be medically contraindicated under the specification set out in the Australian Immunisation Handbook. Note 1: During the 28 days, the person may still be qualified to receive child care assistance. Note 2: Retrospective claims are dealt with differently - see section 23. (2) If, to be immunised, the child must receive a course of vaccinations, the Secretary may, subject to subsection (3), treat the child as having that immunisation if the Secretary is satisfied that the child has received one or more of the vaccinations in that course and is likely to complete the course within a reasonable time. (3) Without limiting the circumstances in which the Secretary may refuse to exercise the discretion under subsection (2) in favour of the person, the Secretary may refuse to exercise that discretion in favour of the person if: a) Before the notice referred to in subsection (1) was given to the person, information was provided to the person, or the person's partner, but the Department or the Agency in relation to the need for children to be immunised in order for payments under this Act to be made; and b) Since the information was provided, there has been a reasonable opportunity to have the child immunised. 23 The immunisation requirement - retrospective claimants 1) A person who makes a retrospective claim for child care assistance in respect of a session of care for a child under 7 is not qualified to receive child care assistance in respect of that session of care unless the Secretary is satisfied that: a) The child was immunised at the time the session occurred; or b) The session of care occurred after: i) A recognised immunisation provider certified in writing that he or she had discussed with the person the benefits and risks of immunising the child; and ii) The person declared in writing that he or she had a conscientious objection the child being immunised; or c) If the child is a dependent child of another person, the session of care occurred after: i) A recognised immunisation provider certified in writing that he or she had discussed with the other person the benefits and risks of immunising the child; and ii) The other person declared in writing that he or she had a conscientious objection to the child being immunised; or d) Both of the following conditions are satisfied: i) At the time of the session of care, the immunisation of the child was medically contraindicated under the specifications set out in the Australian Immunisation Handbook ii) A recognised immunisation provider has certified in writing that the immunisation is medically contraindicated under those specifications; or e) The person was, at the time of the session of care, covered by an exemption under subsection (3). 2) If: a) The Secretary is satisfied as mentioned in paragraph of subsection (1) in relation to the child; and b) The person or the person's partner later makes another retrospective claim for child care assistance in relation to the child; The Secretary is to regard that paragraph as also being satisfied in relation to the child and the later claim, unless the Secretary considers that there is reason to require the matter in the paragraph to be re-established. 3) The Secretary may, by determination in writing, exempt a specified class of persons from the effect of subsection (1) for a specified period. 4) A determination under subsection (3) is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 46A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901. Meryl Dorey, President The Australian Vaccination Network, Inc. PO Box 177 02 6687 1699 Phone Bangalow NSW 2479 02 6687 2032 FAX van@mypostbox.com http://www.ozemail.com.au/~shotinfo "All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." (Schopenhauer) __________________________________________________________________________________ Any information obtained here is not to be construed as medical OR legal advice. The decision to vaccinate and how you implement that decision is yours and yours alone.