To the whack jobs entering schools in the name of social protest

[rustled]

Hosting controversial vaccine clinics on school property, where we are told part of the objective is to help children as young as 12 get vaccinated regardless of their parents' concerns, is IMO inappropriate.

It has served as a way for the government to shift focus away from any discussion of whether or not it's appropriate to host vaccine clinics on school property, or to attempt to make it easier for children as young as 12 to get vaccines despite their parents' concerns - by setting that focus instead on the protesters.

*removed* The only ones stating "controversial vaccine clinics" are the anti-vaxxers; as for the educated they were provided information to make informed decisions and are making their decisions.

Thank you for drawing my attention to a problem with my choice of wording.

More accurate wording would have been "hosting clinics for a controversial vaccine on school property". We'd be fools to pretend the vaccine isn't controversial. The clinics themselves were not controversial until the powers that be chose to host them on school property. Some pro-vaccine folk have made clear the intention was to make it easier for children as young as 12 to access the vaccine - regardless of their parents' stance.

It's inaccurate to claim only anti-vaxxers find this controversial. I am vaccinated, I'm concerned about people I love who have chosen not to be vaccinated, and I do NOT support hosting the clinics at schools. It seems pointless to me to complain when the protesters who are complaining about the vaccines show up on school property, knowing part of the reason that's where the clinics are being hosted was to distract focus from this end-run around parents.

Using our public schools to undermine parents "for the greater good" has never sat well with me. We should be able to send our children to our public schools without having to be concerned about the social engineering they will be exposed to, IMO. Helping children as young as 12 access vaccinations against their parents wishes is, for me, a bridge too far.

As I stated earlier it is difficult to have meaningful dialogue with the anti bunch, because the first order of their business is to push their agenda and refute the facts. Duh.

It is similarly difficult to have meaningful dialogue with folk who are unable to engage in respectful conversation about whether or not it is appropriate to host clinics for a very controversial vaccine on school property.

[rustled]

*removed* The only ones stating "controversial vaccine clinics" are the anti-vaxxers; as for the educated they were provided information to make informed decisions and are making their decisions.

As I stated earlier it is difficult to have meaningful dialogue with the anti bunch, because the first order of their business is to push their agenda and refute the facts. Duh.

I disagree. A lot of protests are much less about the vaccine itself, but whether or not it should be mandatory, or protesting vaccine passports. Because it really is political when the government decides that everyone must get it, and does everything in its power to destroy the lives of people who refuse. Its not the vaccine I'm concerned with, its government overreach, its where the vaccine passports will lead, and its the removal of freedom of choice over what medical procedures we undertake. People never started protesting until governments decided to start forcing it on people, or restricting people from their everyday activities, or shutting down "non-essential" businesses etc.

Interestingly, that's about the same time they started hosting the clinics on school property. I've no doubt they hoped this would re-focus public opinion about protests to ensure no one talked about the reasons for the protests, only about where the protests were taking place.

[spooker]

It's inaccurate to claim only anti-vaxxers find this controversial. I am vaccinated, I'm concerned about people I love who have chosen not to be vaccinated, and I do NOT support hosting the clinics at schools. It seems pointless to me to complain when the protesters who are complaining about the vaccines show up on school property, knowing part of the reason that's where the clinics are being hosted was to distract focus from this end-run around parents.

Not enough time to respond in full ... but even the politicians who make the decisions that people are pointing out as the reason for the protests are saying that the protests should be happening at their offices, not at the hospitals, not at the schools ...

Just as the business owner I was talking to last Saturday about his checking passports ... he's had angry people blaming him ... and as he explains, he is just doing his job of keeping his business afloat by following the laws as they are ... if he fails to follow the rules then he gets a $2300 fine per person ... that won't allow him to stay in business ...

Where to protest seems to be more about getting attention than about having a real affect ... not impressive

[rustled]

It's inaccurate to claim only anti-vaxxers find this controversial. I am vaccinated, I'm concerned about people I love who have chosen not to be vaccinated, and I do NOT support hosting the clinics at schools. It seems pointless to me to complain when the protesters who are complaining about the vaccines show up on school property, knowing part of the reason that's where the clinics are being hosted was to distract focus from this end-run around parents.

Not enough time to respond in full ... but even the politicians who make the decisions that people are pointing out as the reason for the protests are saying that the protests should be happening at their offices, not at the hospitals, not at the schools ...

Just as the business owner I was talking to last Saturday about his checking passports ... he's had angry people blaming him ... and as he explains, he is just doing his job of keeping his business afloat by following the laws as they are ... if he fails to follow the rules then he gets a $2300 fine per person ... that won't allow him to stay in business ...

Where to protest seems to be more about getting attention than about having a real affect ... not impressive

Your "response" to my post has nothing to do with what I've been posting about on this topic.

Unless you are interested in discussing the appropriateness of hosting clinics for a controversial vaccine at schools - apparently in part in order to do an end run around parents, apparently in part to put them where the protests will be the focus rather than the appropriateness of the location, there is little point (IMO) in claiming you are making an effort to "respond" to my post, and little point (IMO) quoting me in your "response".

[spooker]

Not enough time to respond in full ... but even the politicians who make the decisions that people are pointing out as the reason for the protests are saying that the protests should be happening at their offices, not at the hospitals, not at the schools ...

Just as the business owner I was talking to last Saturday about his checking passports ... he's had angry people blaming him ... and as he explains, he is just doing his job of keeping his business afloat by following the laws as they are ... if he fails to follow the rules then he gets a $2300 fine per person ... that won't allow him to stay in business ...

Where to protest seems to be more about getting attention than about having a real affect ... not impressive

Your "response" to my post has nothing to do with what I've been posting about on this topic.

Unless you are interested in discussing the appropriateness of hosting clinics for a controversial vaccine at schools - apparently in part in order to do an end run around parents, apparently in part to put them where the protests will be the focus rather than the appropriateness of the location, there is little point (IMO) in claiming you are making an effort to "respond" to my post, and little point (IMO) quoting me in your "response".

I thought a couple of pages ago we already established the fact that we don't agree on whether it is useful to hold a clinic at a school ... you said that you thought it was pointless to complain about protestors at school and my response was that it was valid to complain ... you post, I respond ... I started off by saying it wasn't going to be a comprehensive response so I quoted only the section that I was responding to ... "apparently" I was mistaken that you said what you said ...

[JLives]

It's inaccurate to claim only anti-vaxxers find this controversial. I am vaccinated, I'm concerned about people I love who have chosen not to be vaccinated, and I do NOT support hosting the clinics at schools. It seems pointless to me to complain when the protesters who are complaining about the vaccines show up on school property, knowing part of the reason that's where the clinics are being hosted was to distract focus from this end-run around parents.

Not enough time to respond in full ... but even the politicians who make the decisions that people are pointing out as the reason for the protests are saying that the protests should be happening at their offices, not at the hospitals, not at the schools ...

Just as the business owner I was talking to last Saturday about his checking passports ... he's had angry people blaming him ... and as he explains, he is just doing his job of keeping his business afloat by following the laws as they are ... if he fails to follow the rules then he gets a $2300 fine per person ... that won't allow him to stay in business ...

Where to protest seems to be more about getting attention than about having a real affect ... not impressive

Of course it's about attention. That's all these whack jobs care about. To be clear, the only people I am calling whack jobs are those who protest at schools and hospitals. For any reason.

All the school is doing is providing access for those who choose, of their own legal accord, to take the vaccine. Same as has been done for years. It has nothing to do with parents finding it controversial (it isn't) and especially with non-parents who most of these protestors were that entered school property. The schools were on lock down for days after that, just leave kids the hell alone.

[rustled]

Your "response" to my post has nothing to do with what I've been posting about on this topic.

Unless you are interested in discussing the appropriateness of hosting clinics for a controversial vaccine at schools - apparently in part in order to do an end run around parents, apparently in part to put them where the protests will be the focus rather than the appropriateness of the location, there is little point (IMO) in claiming you are making an effort to "respond" to my post, and little point (IMO) quoting me in your "response".

I thought a couple of pages ago we already established the fact that we don't agree on whether it is useful to hold a clinic at a school ... you said that you thought it was pointless to complain about protestors at school and my response was that it was valid to complain ... you post, I respond ... I started off by saying it wasn't going to be a comprehensive response so I quoted only the section that I was responding to ... "apparently" I was mistaken that you said what you said ...

Apparently you prefer not to discuss the issue.
The focus tends to be on the problem of protesters showing up on school property, rather than the question of whether or not it's appropriate to host clinics for a very controversial vaccine on school property in order to a) do an end run around parents of children as young as 12, b) place these clinics where the protesters will have the most difficulty getting their concerns heard, c) both.

[Mtn Biker]

Apparently you prefer not to discuss the issue.
The focus tends to be on the problem of protesters showing up on school property, rather than the question of whether or not it's appropriate to host clinics for a very controversial vaccine on school property in order to a) do an end run around parents of children as young as 12, b) place these clinics where the protesters will have the most difficulty getting their concerns heard, c) both.

It is absolutely appropriate for the IHA to host clinics where ever they want, including schools. Your choice of "controversial" is in your mind and that of the other 1%, while the remaining 99% would disagree with you. "An end around parents" .. provide the proof that one child was vaccinate against their parents wishes or without their knowledge - inflammatory nonfactual comment. The protesters were present at the clinic I saw, filming away for the 11:00 news, and only when they interfered with other folks, but particularly when they began harassing children and their parents, did IHA call and the RCMP stepped in. And the filming stopped. Anyhow it was comical to watch them squirm away with no effect at all, expect to show their faces and reveal who they are.

[rustled]

Apparently you prefer not to discuss the issue.
The focus tends to be on the problem of protesters showing up on school property, rather than the question of whether or not it's appropriate to host clinics for a very controversial vaccine on school property in order to a) do an end run around parents of children as young as 12, b) place these clinics where the protesters will have the most difficulty getting their concerns heard, c) both.

It is absolutely appropriate for the IHA to host clinics where ever they want, including schools. Your choice of "controversial" is in your mind and that of the other 1%, while the remaining 99% would disagree with you.

Are these stats your estimations?

It's disingenuous to suggest the vaccines are not controversial, and that hosting them at schools - particularly elementary schools - would not be considered controversial.

"An end around parents" .. provide the proof that one child was vaccinate against their parents wishes or without their knowledge - inflammatory nonfactual comment.

No need. Several people here who think it's a-ok to host these clinics at public schools suggested that was part of the reason for doing it - to make it easier for children to get vaccinated when their parents don't want them to be vaccinated.

The protesters were present at the clinic I saw, filming away for the 11:00 news, and only when they interfered with other folks, but particularly when they began harassing children and their parents, did IHA call and the RCMP stepped in. And the filming stopped. Anyhow it was comical to watch them squirm away with no effect at all, expect to show their faces and reveal who they are.

They wouldn't have been at the schools if the vaccine clinics weren't at the schools. As a bonus for the people who decided to host vaccine clinics at schools, you are still talking about the protesters - still not willing to acknowledge ignoring what other people said about how this would make it easier for children whose parents didn't want them to be vaccinated to get vaccinated anyway. I think we're all aware of how peer pressure works at that age, too...

[FreeSpirit4Ever]

If those entering the schools aren't carrying the virus then they wouldn't be terrorists.

Hosting the vaccine clinics in a school was pretty clever - makes the vaccine clinic even more of a "sacred space", and very difficult for anyone to protest, easier to condemn them if they do. Protesting the vaccine clinics anywhere is already verboten, hosting them in schools seemed to me to be to help generate public outcry against the protesters. Voila.

And then someone suggested the objective of the protest was to prevent children from getting vaccinated - which tends rather to suggest that the objective of having the vaccine clinics in the schools in the first place was to make it easier to vaccinate children whose parents had decided against vaccinations for their children.

We do live in interesting times.

BINGO! But it is much more fun for global news to assume that they are “terrorists”. It’s amazing to me the stupidity of the masses that they will believe anything the media tells them. But only if it’s salacious. In fact that is exactly why the protesters were there it was to do with young children not needing consent for vaccines from their parents. And if I’m not mistaken probably 100% of people were shocked and did not agree with children not needing their parents consent for vaccines. But now since these people actually went to meet with people in the office of that school apparently speaking to them for over an hour, But now they are terrorists. Even the parents in this situation are dumber than stumps And you can tell from the responses they don’t even understand what’s going on chances are they never even paid attention in the first place.

And not for nothing but the politician who called those protesters not only “whack jobs” but “Cov idiots” Doesn’t seem to be speaking publicly anymore as a matter fact I just mentioned that to a family member tonight what happened to Farnsworth did he push it too far by name calling taxpayers? I bet that poor excuse of a politician Has had his wings clipped by Horgan. Farnsworth is the the same guy who decided that the ranchers at Monte lake we’re a bunch of idiots as well, For trying to save their ranches in their homes and their livelihoods. Farnsworth can kiss me where the sun don’t shine. I think he’s been told to shut it. Good call. Cute how certain posters are picking up on the word “wack jobs” when they don’t even know what happened.

[Mtn Biker]

BINGO! But it is much more fun for global news to assume that they are “terrorists”. It’s amazing to me the stupidity of the masses that they will believe anything the media tells them.

What makes them terrorists is their methods. No one has said they are not entitle to their opinions, but bringing them to the steps, doors, and inside institutions to rant their perspective, after they have been respectfully asked to leave, is what makes them terrorist. They "terrorized" the staff and students with their aggressive stands and base level lack of respect for the persons there and the fact they "DO NOT" make policy, Pretty easy for the majority to understand. So really, those who can't or won't understand, must have some serious deep level issues and it must be a sad life to lead.

[rustled]

BINGO! But it is much more fun for global news to assume that they are “terrorists”. It’s amazing to me the stupidity of the masses that they will believe anything the media tells them.

What makes them terrorists is their methods. No one has said they are not entitle to their opinions, but bringing them to the steps, doors, and inside institutions to rant their perspective, after they have been respectfully asked to leave, is what makes them terrorist. They "terrorized" the staff and students with their aggressive stands and base level lack of respect for the persons there and the fact they "DO NOT" make policy, Pretty easy for the majority to understand. So really, those who can't or won't understand, must have some serious deep level issues and it must be a sad life to lead.

Did they "terrorize" the staff and students? So often these stories are sensationalized to suit the narrative. Likely there was more than one protest, so more than one group, so more than one scenario. I suspect their behaviour ranged from quiet, respectful demonstration to voice their concerns, to "terrorizing" staff and students. Passion often clouds our judgement.

IMO, it is pretty easy to understand the consternation of the people who don't think it's right to vaccinate children as young as 12 against Covid without parental agreement. And that having community members willing to protest the hosting of these clinics at schools to make protesting them "off limits" is LESS of a problem for all of us, long-term, than having a government that intentionally sets up clinics to make it easier to vaccinate children as young as 12 regardless of parental agreement.

It will be interesting to see whether or not these clinics continue to be hosted on elementary school properties once the age limit for vaccination is lowered. People who have made the case that 12-year-olds are competent to make decisions for their own health and long-term well-being may have to decide whether they're going to support the same autonomy for children in kindergarten. (Which IMO would show a base level of respect for parents that may reflect some serious deep level issues.)

[JLives]

These people aren't terrorists. Idiots yes. But this is not what terrorism is.

Children 12 years and up are legally able to make health decisions for their own bodies. It does not apply to those younger. Parental agreement doesn't apply either. I thought I explained that already.

[rustled]

These people aren't terrorists. Idiots yes. But this is not what terrorism is.

Children 12 years and up are legally able to make health decisions for their own bodies. It does not apply to those younger. Parental agreement doesn't apply either. I thought I explained that already.

You explained your opinion already. In your opinion, children age 12 and up should be considered mature minors, capable of understanding the details of the treatment, including risks and benefits.

Not everyone thinks all 12-year-olds are that mature, including our government:

According to HealthLinkBC, under the B.C. Infants Act, children may consent to a medical treatment on their own so long as the health-care provider is sure the treatment is in the child’s best interest, and the child understands the details of the treatment, including risks and benefits.

Many of us easily recognize that 12-year-olds generally don't understand risks very well. We do not agree they are more capable of understanding the risks and benefits associated with vaccinations than their parents are.

It is up to the health-care provider to assess and ensure the child’s understanding of the treatment.

Mature minor consent is the consent a child gives to receive health care after the child has been assessed by a health-care provider as having the necessary understanding to give the consent.

We know that assessing what a child genuinely understands and does not really understand isn't easy, even for their parents and teachers who know them.

A child who is a mature minor may make their own health-care decisions independent of their parents’ or guardians’ wishes.

Which brings us the the question, is a 12-year-old a mature minor?

In B.C. there is no set age when a child is considered capable to give consent. However, HealthLinkBC says common practice is for parents or guardians of children in Grade 6 to give consent for their child to be immunized.

Children in Grade 9 and older are given the opportunity to consent for themselves.

(My emphasis. Links for the quoted material at viewtopic.php?p=2891347#p2891347 )

Again: The objective of hosting these clinics in schools is, like the vaccine passports, more about engaging in political and social engineering than about protecting public health. Hosting them in schools provided a way to turn the focus away from this, and onto the protesters who brought it to your attention.

This may have worked to get these clinics onto school property to vaccinate children as young as 12 - all of whom according to what you've posted should be presumed to meet the definition of "mature minor", although the provincial government hasn't previously been so blasé and allowed for parental agreement for previous vaccines, for children younger than grade 9 (so 14 years of age).

Now that the clinics have been in the schools, and the community has shown it objects more to the objectors than the clinics doing an end run around parents, it will be interesting to see whether or not there is any objection to children being vaccinated at younger ages, without their parents agreement.

[JLives]

https://www.healthlinkbc.ca/healthlinkb ... munization

In B.C., immunizations for school aged children are given in grade 6 and grade 9 (and other grades if children are behind in immunization or at risk for certain vaccine-preventable diseases). Most of the time, the vaccines are given by nurses at immunization clinics held at schools. Children may also get vaccines at a health unit, youth clinic, doctor's office or pharmacy. In all of these settings, a child can consent to the vaccine on their own behalf if the health care provider has determined that the child is capable of making this decision.

It's not an opinion. Children from the age of 12 can legally consent for themselves in most cases. Parents do not have the right to override this regardless of how many youtube videos they've watched. We don't own our children's bodies. Period. And children in Grade 6 are 11.