Sender: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 2 May 2008 16:42:40 -0600 |
Content-Disposition: |
inline |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
<5049FD2E270F482281537857C7C0A563@MarcusPC> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Ah yes, in Colorado it is a VERY parent friendly state. I guess the
solution then is to have a homebirth if a parent is in a non-friendly state
and doesn't want tests or vaccinations done post birth? Another solution
would be for parents to be proactive and think about birthing in a
neighboring or different state that is parental rights friendly and not
set-up so the state basically can usurp the parents.
Desirre
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Jake Marcus <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Respectfully, this is not correct. Whether there is a legal requirement
> for certain post-natal procedures is a matter of state law. Some states
> require some procedures/tests, some don't. Some have exemptions (medical
> and/or religious), some don't. Most recently a family temporarily lost
> custody of their newborn son in Nebraska (USA) for refusing genetic
> screening tests (PKU, etc.). The tests are mandated by Nebraska state law
> and there is no religious exemption. This case got significant press when
> the judge refused to allow the mother to breastfeed the child while he was
> in state custody and forcibly tested the child prior to the resolution of a
> legal appeal.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Jake Marcus, J.D.
>
>
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
|
|
|