Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was always under the impression that the government made teachers/tutors available to children who could not attend school for medical reasons, who came to the children's homes to teach them privately at taxpayer expense, because all children are entitled to an education.
Is this true or a myth ?
When the government bans children from attending school if they are not vaccinated, would the same service be available to them? If it is, it could get pretty expensive to the taxpayers. If I lived in California, I know I would be tempted to avoid vaccinating my child to get free one-on-one tutoring at home by a licensed teacher! What better education could you hope for? My ethics might stop me, but there are far more people who wouldn't think twice about it. Look at all the wealthy parents who spare no expense to find a doctor that will give their child a diagnosis of some minor learning disability, even a fake one, just so they can get free tutoring and other special benefits. Many of these same people might feel that skipping vaccinations to get free one-on-one tutoring was a good deal. Skipping vaccinations would certainly be easier than getting the kid a diagnosis for some medical condition that prevents them from attending school.
On the other hand, if the government does not send tutors to homes to help children who can't attend school because they aren't vaccinated, then the government would be denying them an education.
The homeschoolers could enroll in online schooling but a school district would not send a private teacher or tutor to a child's home at the tax payer's expense. Any expense to hire a tutor or to enroll in an online school would be on the homeschooling family. Some people like Suzy think that all people who don't vax are rich and can afford to quit jobs to homeschool but she's not living in reality.
I was always under the impression that the government made teachers/tutors available to children who could not attend school for medical reasons, who came to the children's homes to teach them privately at taxpayer expense, because all children are entitled to an education.
Is this true or a myth ?
When the government bans children from attending school if they are not vaccinated, would the same service be available to them? If it is, it could get pretty expensive to the taxpayers. If I lived in California, I know I would be tempted to avoid vaccinating my child to get free one-on-one tutoring at home by a licensed teacher! What better education could you hope for? My ethics might stop me, but there are far more people who wouldn't think twice about it. Look at all the wealthy parents who spare no expense to find a doctor that will give their child a diagnosis of some minor learning disability, even a fake one, just so they can get free tutoring and other special benefits. Many of these same people might feel that skipping vaccinations to get free one-on-one tutoring was a good deal. Skipping vaccinations would certainly be easier than getting the kid a diagnosis for some medical condition that prevents them from attending school.
On the other hand, if the government does not send tutors to homes to help children who can't attend school because they aren't vaccinated, then the government would be denying them an education.
Parents that choose to put their kids health at risk by not vaccinating (without an exemption which thankfully will be much harder to get) would not be entitled to private tutors. No.
Vaccinate and join society. Ignore unequivocal science and keep your kid at home for school. They would have access to curriculum from the state. "Public" school and "public" health go hand in hand. You're a fierce individualist? Enjoy home schooling your special snowflake. Ironically, if they get sick with measles they might get that tutor you're looking for.
The homeschoolers could enroll in online schooling but a school district would not send a private teacher or tutor to a child's home at the tax payer's expense. Any expense to hire a tutor or to enroll in an online school would be on the homeschooling family. Some people like Suzy think that all people who don't vax are rich and can afford to quit jobs to homeschool but she's not living in reality.
All people who don't vax aren't rich. But all those who don't vax can send their children to public school by making a simple trip or two to the doctor's office or their local pharmacy.
The situation can be easily rectified by doing what the rest of us have done for years without incident.
I have no doubt that that is what most anti-vaccinators will do when reality strikes in the month of August just before school starts.
Parents that choose to put their kids health at risk by not vaccinating (without an exemption which thankfully will be much harder to get) would not be entitled to private tutors. No.
This isn't a matter of what the "parents" are entitled to, but rather what the children are entitled to.
If the government refused to educate young children because their parents did not raise them the way the government wants, and those children reach adulthood without knowing how to read because the government refused them an education, would those children be able to file a lawsuit against the state and sue the taxpayers for denying them an education?
There were 3 cases in Florida after Disney. Two adults living in the same household with no other information given. International traveler at Miami Convention Hotel who went sightseeing to other places. None of these people spread it to others.
The Florida school with the outbreak where I worked was a Title One School. The students came from and went back to their home countries of Mexico and Haiti. Other than the 3 students with measles in the same family, nobody else in the school came down with measles, including the unvaccinated kids there.
I do agree, Katrina, that the media is creating panic and more of an issue than it really is.
It's Katarina, and that's not what I meant.
While there no love lost on the media on my part, I'm glad for all the publicity the measles outbreak brought. I have a feeling some of that publicity contributed to the new California immunization LAW!
What I'm saying is this: Of the 110 CA patients, only 39 had a documented visit to Disney. At least 34 were secondary exposures. (Some have undocumented status.) In Colorado, one person visited Disney, came back and got measles in CO. There were no secondary exposures. Since 90% of non-immune people will get measles if exposed, and this person exposed a lot of people, that means the vast majority of his contacts were immune, most by immunization. So even though CO supposedly has the lowest kindergarten measles vaccination rate in the country, we didn't see these secondary cases. I think it's because the statistics are being correctly collected. I know this because when the CO Dept of Health proposed making exemptions harder to get by requiring them to be submitted yearly instead of just once ever, my school district sent them a letter of objection, saying collecting immunization rates is not an educational activity. That is the priority they attach to it. (The proposal passed anyway. My local health dept. did send a letter in support.
You did not trigger a shingles outbreak by exposing others to your chickenpox. It's not possible.
Geesch, how know many baths I gave my own kids when both of them had chicken pox? I touched them countless times. That neither gave me chicken pox (again), nor shingles.
Neither chicken pox nor shingles is an air borne disease. The pox must be touched. The oozing (only when oozing) rash of shingles must be touched for somebody to catch chicken pox. You cannot catch shingles, if you had chicken pox yourself, even if you DO touch the rash. Been there, done that on my husband's back. lol Your own body brings it on; not other people.
Far too many people do not know their OWN science on these diseases.
Incidentally, if the government can keep children out of schools because their parents did not raise the kids the way the government dictates, can we do this with other children also?
There is a great deal of research indicating that children who are regularly exposed to violent TV programs, movies, and video games are more likely to commit violence, due to desensitization. Can the government ban children from attending school if their parents let them watch that stuff?
Personally, I worry more about my daughter attending school with kids who watch violent rated-R movies than kids that haven't been vaccinated. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I'm sure we can come up with several other examples of cases where government could ban certain children from schools due to poor choices by their parents. Would this be a good thing? Should states be allowed to deny an education to children if their parents don't follow rules dictated by their local governments?
What other children should be kicked out of schools?
If you could dictate which families should not be allowed to send their children to school, which types would it be? Should we ban children from school if somebody in their family has a criminal record? What about kids who come from families with unpopular religious beliefs?
Actually, I think that laws should be evaluated based on their potential for setting precedents.
I consider it ignorant to make policies without giving any consideration to the future implications of such policies.
I can assure you the legislators have staffs that assess the impact of legislation
Vaccinate your kid, save their health/life and quite possibly the health/life of a baby, elderly person, individual already suffering from a serious disease that compromises their immune system.
Or, you could homeschool - bottom line is, this law has been tested and I for one support the fact that politicians from all end of the political spectrum are putting the interests of the vast majority of the population ahead of a very vocal underinformed (or selectively overinformed?) minority.
Maybe I'll be surprised and homeschooling will sky rocket. Then measles will take hold in those "pockets" and the parents will have to deal with their consequences. It's unfortunate that many of the most vulnerable will still be exposed to your kids.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
