data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/83e80/83e80085f5b48a712222720a38674f48ee443db2" alt=""
Lauren Moye, FISM News
[elfsight_social_share_buttons id=”1″]
California could become the state with the lowest age for autonomous COVID-19 vaccinations, thanks to legislation introduced on Thursday by a state lawmaker.
“Let’s let teens protect their health,” Democratic State Senator Scott Wiener tweeted, after introducing his Teens Choose Vaccines Act. His SB 866 will allow for minors 12 years of age and over to vaccinate without parental consent and will apply to all vaccines approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
“Giving young people the autonomy to receive life-saving vaccines, regardless of their parents’ beliefs or work schedules, is essential for their physical and mental health,” said Wiener.
He added specifically about COVID-19, “So many teens want to be vaccinated so that they can lead a more normal life — participating in sports or band, traveling, going to friends’ homes — but they’re prevented from doing so due to their parents’ political views or inability to find the time.”
“There are a lot of students who would utilize this bill,” said 17-year-old California resident Ani Chaglasian to LA Times. She is an ambassador for Teens for Vaccines, which specializes in providing advice for teens in anti-vaccine families. Chaglasian is also one of the students who would take the COVID-19 vaccine against her parents’ wishes. “There are vaccine pop-ups at our school, and they could do this without having to deal with backlash in their families.”
The bill has received swift pushback from Wiener’s colleagues. Republican Assemblyman James Gallagher referred to the proposal as “another example of Democrats wanting to remove parents from the equation.”
While California law already allows for the same age group to make autonomous health decisions on receiving the Human Papillomavirus and Hepatitis B vaccines, the debate around parental authority in a teenager’s health decision is multi-faceted and often contentious legislation both among lawmakers and the people they represent.
Some of the pushback from ordinary citizens can be seen in reply to Wiener’s announcement tweet:
#SB866 is yet MORE divisiveness. Vilifies parents; implies they're merely inconvenient obstacles. SHOWS gov't can sweep in w/any law about YOUR kid at any time. Witness CA's agenda to gain control by any means necessary. ALL US parents should shudder at this bill.
— Rhonda Schlumpberger (@RhondaSchlumpb) January 21, 2022
Stupid idea. You are sending a kid home to potentially have a dangerous side effect and the parents won’t know they’d taken the shot. 9 times out of 10 a 12 yr old doesn’t know their medical history to avoid interactions. This is why kids have parents.
— Citizeness D (@CitizenessD) January 21, 2022
https://twitter.com/vasaver79/status/1484612449345093638
“I think there will be bipartisan support for the proposition that parents should be involved in their kids’ healthcare decisions, in deciding what types of medical care and drugs they should be taking,” Gallagher stated, signaling that the bill will meet opposition on both sides of the political spectrum.
In other words, when teens have to “plot, scheme, or fight with their parents” as Wiener tweeted in his pro-bill thread, lawmakers will also have to contend with those same parents at the election polls if they pass a bill that circumvents that parent’s authority over the teenager.
If passed and signed by California Governor Gavin Newsom, the law would not go into effect until Jan. 01 of next year.
Currently, Washington D.C. grants autonomous decision power for COVID-19 vaccinations to children ages 11 and up.