Remember Rep. Gene Wu’s despicable moment on the House floor in 2017 where he claimed that as soon as CPS removes a child from the home – NOT when parental rights have been terminated, NOT when wrongdoing has been proven, but the moment a child is removed from a home – that child is now “a child of the state” and therefore subject to whatever medical procedure the state deems necessary, including vaccination? (See video below)
2019 UPDATE: Remember Rep. Gene Wu's despicable moment on the House floor in 2017 where stated children belong to the state? Well, he is back at it this legislative session and only time will tell how far he will go with his extreme beliefs! Check out our blog for more info: ORIGINAL POST (2017): In this horrifying moment, Gene Wu for State Representative 137 claims a child in temporary custody, whose parents have NOT been found guilty of any wrong doing, belong to the state. Watch for yourself and then decide how you feel about this idea that, when parental rights have not yet been terminated, the state owns these children! If this doesn't scare you into action, I'm not sure what will. We must stop this complete disregard for parental rights. NOW. Thank you, Rep. Jonathan Stickland for your unwavering comittment to parental rights.#TFVC#parentscalltheshots#thechoiceshouldbeyours#dontCaliforniaMYTexas
Posted by Texans For Vaccine Choice on Friday, May 19, 2017
Well, he’s at it again: attacking medical privacy by authoring HB 1966, a stepping stone bill that would easily lead to mandated campus reporting for child care facilities. Here’s an excerpt:
“A child-care facility may provide notice on the percentage of children attending the facility who are immunized.”
Our questions for Rep. Wu:
1. What problem does your bill solve? Show us where unvaccinated children have caused outbreaks at child care facilities in this state, and we can have an honest conversation about this.
2. Since when does the number of vaccine exemptions directly reflect the health of a child care facility? Let’s pretend that number was somehow relevant, then why does your bill not allow these facilities to also report the percentage of staff up-to-date on the adult vaccine schedule? Or are only exempted children somehow capable of getting sick?
3. Why not also allow these facilities to release the percentage of children with known infections? You know, information that IS actually pertinent to campus health?
4. What if a child is completely up-to-date with all immunizations except Hep B? Is that child considered “unvaccinated,” counted among the “unvaccinated percentage,” and therefore somehow a threat?
5. Does your bill require all children in these child care facilities to have their titers drawn to prove immunization? Simply because children have been vaccinated does not mean that immunity was conferred and that they are now “immunized.”
6. What if the child care facility contains only ten children with one utilizing the state exemption form, giving the facility a “90% vaccinated” rate? How difficult would it be to deduce the identity of the ONE child, and therefore subject that child and family to the kind of horrific discrimination and bullying we see here on this page on a daily basis?
This bill promotes the DISCRIMINATION of Texas families and is a perfect example of the SOCIAL MANDATES of which we have so often warned.
Acting on the widespread misinformation promoted by the opposition and the media, these facilities will deny care to children utilizing the state exemption form in order to maintain a high vaccination percentage and avoid the stigma that is attached to the issue.
These facilities may even go so far as to advertise their high percentage, further advancing the false perception that unvaccinated children are a threat.
This will leave parents – single mothers, single fathers, students – STRUGGLING to find child care so that they may attend work in order to provide for their children.
This bill contributes to a situation that would be particularly discriminatory against those who cannot afford private child care. Do we now only allow the PRIVILEGED in our society the “luxury” of making their own health care choices?
This bill may seem relatively harmless on the surface, but it promotes a culture of division, discrimination, and harassment.
Texas is better than that.