The Australian government’s recently proposed childcare package has mandated the ‘full’ schedule of childhood vaccines (up to the age of 19) in order for families to receive government welfare benefits of $15,000. This package has removed the right of parents to refuse any of the 12 vaccines recommended for infants if they wish to receive the benefit. Only medical exemptions for a very few conditions will apply if this legislation is passed. This is being done without the government listing the ingredients of vaccines on consent forms for parents or listing them on the Immunise Australia Program (IAP) website. The list of ingredients is only provided in Appendix 3 of the Australian Immunisation Handbook .
The list of ingredients that is injected into developing infants includes aluminium compounds, antibiotics, formaldehyde, sodium borate (linked to infertility), polysorbate 80 (linked to infertility) and thimerosal (a mercury compound that is still present in multi-dose vials of vaccines) and many other additives. This demonstrates a lack of informed consent for the recommended schedule of 16 vaccines up to 19 years of age. Healthy people who do not wish to have all of these vaccines will not be able to receive government welfare benefits after the 1 January 2016 if this legislation is passed. They will also not be eligible for payments to attend childcare centres.
Parents who cannot afford to pay for childcare cannot go to work and earn a living. These payments represent coercive and manipulative measures (using financial payments) that are in breach of the right to informed consent to vaccination that is supported by the World Medical Association and all international bills of human rights. Here is the right to informed consent stated in the Australian Immunisation Handbook. (section 2.1.3). It states free and informed consent must be given “voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion and manipulation”. Giving financial incentives to parents who cannot afford to work without childcare, is a coercive and manipulative strategy that pressures parents to use all the vaccines that the government is recommending – including new ones that are continually added to the schedule.
This is a clear breach of the code of conduct for good medical practice and the International Covenant for Economic, Cultural and Social Rights (ICECSR) which prohibits discriminatory welfare policies and the removal of autonomy over our own bodies. These rights are also covered in the Geneva Declaration and the Nuremberg Code. I have presented this information to the Australian Human Rights Commissioner, Tim Wilson, and he has stated that “no-one is being forced to take a vaccine, therefore there is no human rights violation”. It appears that the Australian Human Rights Commission is not going to protect these rights that are covered in many international human rights covenants.
On Sunday 21 June 2015 Australians took to the street to demonstrate our opposition to these policies. This was not covered in the mainstream media and it is not being properly communicated to the public in the promotion of the proposed childcare package by the Australian government. Many people turned out for this event and it was covered by Real News Australia.. The campaign is titled No Jab, No Pay, NO WAY!. The removal all exemptions, other than medical exemptions has not been mentioned in the mainstream Murdoch media or the ABC and it has not been discussed as an important human rights issue. Here is a poster that can be used to inform people of these rights that are being removed.
One response to “The Australian Government’s New Childcare Package”
The “No Jab, No Pay” policy sets a dangerous precedent. Many vaccines have been added to the schedule over the years. How many more will be added after this policy is implemented?
Aluminium has been linked to brain damage. How many aluminium containing vaccines can an infant’s developing brain tolerate before irreparable damage is done?
If the government gets away with this assault on our right to informed consent to medical treatment, what other medical treatments might they require in the future, in order for people to receive payments to which they would otherwise be entitled?
It is outrageous that the mainstream media is not questioning this tyrannical policy.