Forcing Doctors to Comply Policy Before Patient
Updated: May 9, 2021
Chapter 8: Article 8
Health Authorities place intense pressure on medical doctors and nurses, to toe the line and not ask questions about the practice of vaccination. Not only are these healthcare workers expected to get their patients fully vaccinated, if they refuse a vaccine for themselves they face public shaming. In response to an Edmonton Journal article, Huffington Post had the following to say:
"Unvaccinated [healthcare] workers are also subject to psychological pressure. As of this month, Alberta's health ministry will be publicizing the vaccination rates of health workers at various facilities, a move whose "intent appears to be to shame or publicly embarrass workers into rolling up their sleeves,"
In other places, health care workers risk losing their jobs if they refuse a vaccine. This is evident in an article that appeared in the Money magazine/website. The article was titled, Workers Are Being Fired for Refusing to Get Flu Shots.
In addition to that, doctors have been silenced and forced to comply, indirectly, by the HHS instruction, which stated that well founded vaccine safety concerns cannot be allowed to exist. This means that doctors have been silenced, simply because they are not being taught the well founded vaccine concerns in the first place. And still, the issue goes much deeper.
In the USA, children are required to be vaccinated for enrollment in school. All States have a medical exemption, allowing parents to opt children out of receiving certain vaccines, if that child had a reaction to a previous dose. But even if one child in a family had a vaccine reaction, that does not mean that siblings will also be given a medical exemption, even though those siblings likely have a similar underlying condition or a similar genetic make-up that may make a vaccine reaction more likely for them as well. If a child does receive a medical exemption for one vaccine that they reacted to, that does not mean that the child is exempt from receiving the other vaccines. In addition to medical exemptions, some States also have philosophical exemptions, and many have religious exemptions; but those are now coming under threat.
In California, philosophical and religious exemptions were abolished recently, as a result of Bill SB 277. That means that if a child residing in California is not vaccinated fully (unless they have a medical exemption, the only exemption available there), they will be denied a public school education. Not all families are financially positioned for one parent to stay home, to home school their children. As a result, many parents are being forced to vaccinate their children against their will so that their children can receive an education. This violates medical ethics which requires that a medical procedure not be pressured or forced on a person against their will.
In the political discussions leading up to the vote on SB 277, one of the concerns and questions raised by doctors was whether the medical establishment would penalize doctors who identified a medical condition or reaction, a reaction which would warrant a vaccine medical exemption. Doctors were assured they would not be penalized for providing medical exemptions.
In Canada, mandatory vaccination is not required for enrollment in school. In fact mandatory vaccination would actually violate the Canadian Constitution. An archived Health Canada document from 1996 states (emphasis mine):
Unlike some countries, immunization is not mandatory in Canada; it cannot be made mandatory because of the Canadian Constitution. Only three provinces have legislation or regulations under their health-protection acts to require proof of immunization for school entrance. Ontario and New Brunswick require proof for diphtheria, tetanus, polio, measles, mumps, and rubella immunization. In Manitoba, only measles vaccination is covered. It must be emphasized that, in these three provinces, exceptions are permitted for medical or religious grounds and reasons of conscience; legislation and regulations must not be interpreted to imply compulsory immunization.
Despite that, I’ve heard rumblings at both the Federal and Provincial level, about making vaccination mandatory. In time, we will see what that amounts to. (Update: Alberta has passed legislation (Bill 28) which requires childrens' vaccination status to be disclosed. Though unvaccinated children will not be booted out of public schools as a standard practice, that reality changes during outbreaks. During outbreaks unimmunized children will be forced out of school for the duration of the outbreak. The media release for Bill 28 stated that outbreaks often last weeks, which basically threatens parents that their children will be denied public schooling for weeks at a time. So, we'll see how this new bill plays out.)
With that background provided, let’s now talk specifically about what has been happening to our doctors when they speak out, if they raise questions or concerns about vaccination research, vaccination reactions or vaccination policy. Here, I will highlight what has happened to four doctors, but many other doctors face these same situations.
Professor John Walker-Smith
Previously I spoke about Prof. John Walker Smith (in Ch8: Part 1). The British General Medical Council (GMC) accused him of professional misconduct, and in the same disciplinary hearing in 2010 with Andrew Wakefield and Prof Simon Murch – all authors on the 1998 “fraudulent” medical paper – Walker-Smith and Wakefield were stripped of their medical licenses. Walker-Smith filed an appeal, which was paid for by his medical insurance. Wakefield’s insurance did not cover the cost of his appeal. On appeal Walker-Smith was completely exonerated of any wrong doing or professional misconduct and his medical license was re-instated. Remember the High Court judge concluded that the GMC had "inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion."
Dr. Andrew Wakefield
In Ch8: Article 1, I presented a number of concerning details which showed how there is a significant double standard occurring in mainstream media reporting. On a later day I will go into much more detail about Dr. Andrew Wakefield, but until then, I will leave you with an interview he gave, linked here, where he talks about the professional misconduct hearing with the GMC, and the fraud accusations he's faced since. You can also read his account of what has happened to him, in his book titled Callous Disregard.
Dr. Jayne Donegan (Here and Here)
Another British medical doctor faced a disciplinary hearing in 2007, also by the GMC, and again the allegations were of professional misconduct. In 2002, prior to the allegations, Dr. Donegan had provided testimony in a court case (2 fathers wanted their children vaccinated, and their ex-partners, the mothers of those children didn’t want their children vaccinated). Dr. Jayne Donegan testified in support of the mothers, stating that vaccinations are unnecessary. In 2004, the GMC charged her with professional misconduct for the testimony she provided in that trial. Her disciplinary hearing took place in 2007 and lasted for three weeks. Despite the odds stacked against her, the conclusion of trial was that Dr. Donegan was completely exonerated of all allegations of wrong doing and professional misconduct.
To quote an article linked above, about Dr. Donegan’s experience:
Dr. Donegan was asked after her GMC enquiry ended, what had she learned from this experience:
Perhaps it is that if a parent says, “I’m worried about the safety of vaccination,” they are told, “You don’t understand, you’re not a doctor.” However if a doctor says, “I’m worried about the safety of vaccination,” they are told, “We’re charging you with serious professional misconduct…
Dr. Bob Sears (Here)
In September 2016, the Medical Board of California charged Dr. Bob Sears with gross negligence. This happened because he provided a vaccine medical exemption to a patient out of concern that the child might be harmed further, by further vaccinations. Dr. Bob Sears had also spoken out firmly against Bill SB 277, which removed a parent’s right to not vaccinate their child for philosophical or religious reason. Of course during the SB 277 political discussions before the bill went for voting, California doctors were promised they would not be penalized for providing medical exemptions. The charges brought against Dr. Bob Sears’ for gross negligence because of the vaccine medical exemptions he offered patients, are directly counter to the political promises that were made. In an article linked below, several doctors weigh in on their thoughts about what has happened to Dr. Bob Sears, and their concerns for themselves.
A few quotes in that article include:
But the Ventura County doctor I spoke to off the record said he has not written a single exemption and does not plan to ever write one, no matter how medically indicated or important to the child’s health. Instead, he refers families seeking exemptions to a different, older doctor. I’m a coward, he said. I’m afraid of losing my license...
We practice medicine because we love it,” yet another Southern California pediatrician speaking on the condition of anonymity, said to me. “I don’t want them to come after my license and take away the thing I love the most...
But is it really in the interests of public health or of any individual child’s well-being to legislate medical compliance, ignore the risks of a medical intervention, and muzzle doctors? Dr. Cammy Benton does not think so.
Until we have an open, honest discussion without fear of punishment, we’re never going to be able to move forward and have a safer schedule,” Benton, who opposes any mandatory vaccine laws, insists. “We’re being forced to comply with everything and not question anything. I think it’s my responsibility to speak up. I have to, for the sake of my own children.
Unwarranted disciplinary actions brought against our doctors obviously put them in an extremely difficult situation – when doctors see the concerning things happening to their colleagues who are speaking out about vaccines, will they stand with them or sit back down quietly. Will they choose to honour the needs of their patients first, or will they choose to remain silent to protect themselves and protect their reputations and careers? It’s unfortunate, but many doctors are choosing to remain silent. To conclude the discussion on this topic, I’d simply like to leave you with a couple of questions to think about:
Does it not concern you that our doctors CANNOT publicly criticize or question vaccination research, vaccine reactions, or vaccination policy, without fear of losing their license to practice medicine?
Do you not see how truly dangerous it is to silence our doctors questions and concerns, by threatening destruction of their reputation as a good doctor, in essence demonizing them in an effort to silence any dissent?
And finally, how do you think public safety is affected, for better or for worse, when doctors feel they cannot ask questions or express the concerns they have about public health policy, for fear that in doing so they will be de-licensed?
CONTINUE to the next post: Ch8: Part 9
Edmonton Journal Article - Publicly shaming unvaccinated health care workers Here
Archived Health Canada Document that states mandatory vaccination violates the Canadian Constitution Here
Workers Are Being Fired for Refusing to Get Flu Shots Here
Read an article about Professor John Walker-Smith Here
Watch an interview with Dr. Andrew Wakefield Here
Dr. Andrew Wakefield's book Callous Disregard Here
Read a couple of articles about Dr. Jayne Donegan Here and Here
Read an article about Dr. Bob Sears Here
And Here's an interview given by Dr. Suzanne Humphries. She discusses other reasons why doctors are terrified to speak up about their vaccine concerns.