Could Your Child Be Taken Away for Eating Pop Tarts?
By Dr. Kevin McNamee
There is a place in Minnesota, out there on the edge of the prairie, called Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average. So goes the closing words of Garrison Keillor’s monologue for his weekly radio show Prairie Home Companion. For an hour or two, his audience is transported to a simpler time where neighbors talked and the day’s toughest decision is if one should drive into town and have breakfast at the Chatterbox Café. If life was that simple.
Unfortunately, because we live in California, we can’t live at Lake Wobegon or any resemblance of such an idyllic town. We have been saddled with the Sacramento legislature who continues to disrupt our lives by serving us ample helpings of wacky laws, smothered in good intentions and garnished with social engineering.
The latest example is Senate Bill 18 called the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth in California, sponsored by Richard Pan. On the title’s face, it sounds reasonable. Who would not vote for children and youth having rights not in the Constitution? The bill, if it becomes law, declares that all children and youth have the inherent rights to the following:
- The right to parents, guardians, or caregivers who act in their best
- The right to form healthy attachments with adults responsible for their care and well-being.
- The right to live in a safe and healthy environment.
- The right to social and emotional well-being.
- The right to opportunities to attain optimal cognitive, physical, and social
- The right to appropriate, quality education and life skills leading to self-sufficiency in adulthood.
- The right to appropriate, quality health
The legislative intent is “to establish a comprehensive framework that governs the rights of all children and youth in California, outlines the research-based essential needs of California’s children, and establishes standards relating to the health, safety, well-being, early childhood and educational opportunities, and familial supports necessary for all children to succeed.”1
But the devil is in the details: Questions one should ask – What research-based studies will be used? What standards will be established and by whom? What metric will be used for these standards and how will these be monitored and evaluated for
compliance by the State on a case-by-case basis? Who will enforce these standards and what penalties or fines will be imposed on parents who are not to the State’s standard?
Education: Many parents have embraced home schooling, where parents choose to educate their
children at home instead of sending them to a traditional public or private school.2 By 1993, home schooling has become legal in all 50 states.3 From 2003 to 2012, the number of Ameri- can children 5 through 17 years old who were home schooled rose by 61.8 percent.4 Success
of home schooling is reflected in the high school graduation rates where 66.7% of home schooled students graduate, compared to
57.5% of traditionally educated students.5 Colleges and universities embrace home schooled students, recognizing that they are often better prepared than their brick-and-mortar schooled peers.6
By all measures, home schooling compared to brick- and-mortor schools, is a success built on the freedom a parent has to teach their child the skills to survive and thrive in our society. But what happens to California’s 6.8 million home schooled children7 when a research-based study establishes a standard that
is in conflict with the parent’s values and curriculum? Does the State come in and remove the children using SB18 and the long arm of Child Protective Services (CPS)?
Healthcare: A 2004 article in Pediatric Child Health provided physician guidelines when deciding health choices for children. It states that, “…parents usually have the legal and moral authority to act as surrogates for their children or adolescents, this is not always the case. For instance, parents might not be appropriate decision makers for a child or adolescent…”8
If SB18 becomes law, the State is given ultimate authority to decide healthcare decisions for the child. What happens when a parent takes their child to a doctor who recommends a course of therapy but the parent declines and selects other treatment options? Is the doctor obligated under SB18 to report this to CPS similar to the legal obligation to report un- usual bruising or burns as potential child abuse?
When parents and physicians disagree about a child’s treatment, CPS can be contacted. CPS can take the child from the home and terminate parental authority. The term “medical kidnapping” has been used in these interventions. It can be done without a court order and with the assistance of lo- cal police.
The parents of an Amish girl in Ohio stopped her chemo therapy, however an Ohio court overturned a previous judge’s ruling and awarded custody of the girl to the hospital’s nurse/attorney and continue the chemo. The hospital claimed the child’s life was in danger if she did not continue with it. The child’s parents reported she was doing better without chemo and that chemo was actually killing her. An assertion was made that the child was part of a study for experimental drugs. Discontinuing the treatment therapy could cause the hospital to lose substantial funding for ending the drug trial too soon.9
SB 18 on the surface sounds very attractive, but thinking it through, it becomes clear that it will be difficult to implement, difficult to fairly evaluate all cases and apply consistent standards. It imposes the will of the State and increase its reach into families by usurping parents decisions over their children and interfere with the parent-child relationship.
Garrison Keillor said, “If the government can round up someone and never be required to explain why, then it’s no longer the United States of America as you and I always understood it. Our enemies have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. They have made us become like them.”10 He is a very wise man.
To monitor the bill’s progress in Sacramento, go to https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov and enter SB18.
Dr. Kevin McNamee, a 2018 candidate for the Thousand Oaks City Council, is a 20 year resident of Thousand Oaks and business owner for over 28 years. As a member of the Thousand Oaks Rotary, he volunteers his acupuncture and chiropractic clinical services at the Westminster Free Clinic to many of the city’s illegal immigrant and under-served population. His practice specializes in Asian and herbal medi- cine, blended with traditional Western diagnostics and treatment protocols. In addition to his practice, Dr. McNamee provides pain prevention services to organizations like the Los Angeles Police Department and expert witness legal services. Dr. McNamee’s Anti-Drug presentations for middle and high school students have helped change student attitudes about illegal drug use and abuse. He is also a part- time instructor at Ventura College in the Water Sci- ence Department.
www.CaliforniaHealthInstitute.com
References
- https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2720471/ Treatment decisions regarding infants, children and adolescents Paediatr Child Health. 2004 Feb; 9(2): 99–103.
- http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/ohio-amish-girl-escapes-with-parents-from-forced-chemotherapy-fa- ther-claims-she-was-on-experimental-drugs-without-consent/
- Keillor, Garrison, “Congress’s Shameful Retreat from American Values,” The Chicago Tribune, Oct. 4, 2006 http://www.notable-uotes.com/k/keillor_garrison.html#zfF2uMsQv4mffqhD.99
An act relating to children and youth.
Legislative Counsel’s Digest
SB 18, as introduced, Pan. Bill of Rights for Children and Youth in California.
Existing law provides for the care and welfare of children and youth in various contexts, including, but not limited to, child welfare services, foster care, health care, nutrition, homeless assistance, and education
Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 80 (Res. Ch. 101, Stats. 2009) declares the Legislature’s support of a Bill of Rights for the Children and Youth of California that resolves to invest in all children and youth in order to achieve specified goals to create an optimal environment for their healthy development.
This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to expand and codify the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California to establish a comprehensive framework that governs the rights of all children and youth in California, outlines the research-based essential needs of California’s children, and establishes standards
relating to the health, safety, well-being, early childhood and educational opportunities, and familial supports necessary for all children to succeed. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature, by January 1, 2022, to enact legislation for the purpose of ensuring that the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that all children and youth, regardless of gender, class, race, ethnicity, national origin, culture, religion, immigration status, sexual orientation, or ability, have inher- ent rights that entitle them to line 5 protection, special care, and assistance, including, but not limited to, the following:
- The right to parents, guardians, or caregivers who act in their best
- The right to form healthy attachments with adults responsible for their care and well-being.
- The right to live in a safe and healthy
- The right to social and emotional well-being.
- The right to opportunities to attain optimal cognitive, physical, and social
- The right to appropriate, quality education and life skills leading to self-sufficiency in
- The right to appropriate, quality health
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to expand and codify the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California created by Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 80 (Res. Ch. 101, Stats. 2009), to establish a comprehensive framework that governs the rights of all children and youth in
California, outlines the research-based essential needs of California’s children, and establishes standards relating to the health, safety, well-being, early childhood and educational opportunities, and familial supports necessary for all children to succeed.
SEC. 2. It is the intent of the Legislature, by January 1, 2022, to enact appropriate legislation to accomplish all of the following:
- Develop and put forth research-based policy solutions that will ensure the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state
- Determine the amount of revenue and resources necessary to ensure that the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state
- Identify and obtain the revenue and resources necessary to ensure that the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state.
Get Citizensjournal.us Headlines free SUBSCRIPTION. Keep us publishing – DONATE
