Wellness Exchange: Health Discussions
Vaccine Scandal Threatens 56 Students' Education: Lawsuit Reveals
(upbeat music) - Welcome to Listen To, this is Ted. The news was published on Friday, October 11th. Joining us today are Eric and Kate to discuss a hot button issue. Let's dive right in, shall we? Today we're discussing a recent lawsuit involving 56 Long Island students who faced removal from school due to invalidated vaccination records. Let's start with the basics. Eric, can you explain what this lawsuit is about? - Sure thing, Ted. So, here's the deal. This lawsuit is all about a state investigation into Julie Devuano, who used to be a nurse in Amityville and her practice called Wild Child Pediatrics. Now, get this. The state is accusing Devuano of pulling a fast one and falsifying childhood vaccination records. And you know those records are like gold when it comes to getting kids into school, right? It's a legal requirement, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. - That's right. But let's not lose sight of the real issue here. We're talking about actual kids. - I understand your concern, Kate, but we can't ignore the bigger picture. These vaccination requirements exist for your reason. - Oh, come on. The bigger picture? We're talking about 56 students in 22 districts who were either kicked out of school or on the verge of it. This isn't just some abstract policy debate. It's about real kids facing real consequences. Their entire futures could be hanging in the balance here. - You both raise valid points. Can we dig a little deeper into the specific vaccinations involved in this case? - Absolutely, Ted. So we're not talking about just one or two shots here. The state health department went ahead and voided records for a whole slew of vaccinations. We're talking measles, mumps, diphtheria, you name it, and get this. It wasn't just a handful of kids affected. We're looking at 133 Long Island children, plus one more from Orange County. Now I can't stress enough how crucial these vaccinations are. They're not just protecting the individual students, but also their classmates and the entire community. It's like a shield that protects everyone, you know? - Well, that may be true. We can't just brush aside the severe consequences these students are facing. Let me give you a real example. - I understand you're concerned about individual cases, Kate, but we need to consider the broader implications for- - Oh, spare me the broader implications spiel. We're talking about a Seville High School senior here, a football star for crying out loud. This kid was on the fast track to Yale, and now he might lose his shot at playing college football there. Do you have any idea how life-changing that is? And he's just one of many students whose futures are hanging by a thread because of this- - It's clear this is a complex issue with far-reaching consequences. What's the current status of these students? Are they all out of school? - Well, Ted, the situation's a bit of a moving target. When the lawsuit was filed on September 27th, at least nine students were already barred from attending class, and it wasn't looking good for others. Some were just days away from being shown the door, but here's the kicker. We're kind of in the dark about the current status of most of the students mentioned in the suit. It's a real head scratcher, to be honest. - That's exactly the problem. These poor kids are stuck in limbo, their education dangling by a thread. And let's not forget that- - I understand your frustration, Kate, but we need to consider the options available to these families. - Options? What options? These families are being forced into impossible situations without any semblance of due process. We're talking about a fundamental right here, education. The Constitution demands due process when the government tries to take that away, but apparently that's just too much to ask. - You both raise important points. Eric, what options do these families have? - Well, Ted, according to the court, parents aren't exactly backed into a corner here. They've got a few cards they can play. First off, they can bite the bullet and get the required vaccinations. If that's not their cup of tea, they can opt for blood tests to detect antibodies, kind of like proving they're already immune. And if neither of those float their boat, there's always the home schooling route. Now, I know some folks might grumble, but let's face it, these are pretty reasonable alternatives that keep public health safety in the front seat. - Reasonable? Are you kidding me? These families are being strong-armed into making life-altering decisions-- - Kate, I understand you're passionate about this, but we can't ignore the importance of public health issues. - Oh, don't give me that public health line. We're talking about families being forced to jump through hoops without any real due process. The lawsuit is crystal clear. When the government tries to take away a fundamental right-like education, they need to provide due process. It's not just me saying this, it's what the Constitution demands. - This is clearly a contentious issue. What's the stance of the school districts involved in this lawsuit? - Well, Ted, it's like trying to get blood from a stone. Most of the 22 districts named as defendants are keeping their lips zipped. They're either declining to comment because of the pending litigation, or they're just not responding to requests for comment at all. And when it comes to individual students' vaccination or enrollment status, they're playing it close to the chest. But hey, that's par for the course when it comes to protecting student privacy, right? - Oh, how convenient for them. They're hiding behind legal mumbo jumbo while students' educations are hanging in the balance. Sure, one superintendent, Christine Christiane from-- - Kate, I think you're being a bit unfair. These districts are likely following legal advice and trying to protect student privacy. - What's unfair is leaving these students and families in the dark? Sure, one superintendent spoke up, but what about the other 21 districts? They're all just ducking and dodging while kids' futures are on the line. It's a disgrace. - Let's take a step back and look at this issue from a historical perspective. Can you think of any similar events in the past where vaccination requirements caused controversy in schools? - Absolutely, Ted. This whole situation is giving me major deja vu, taking me back to the 1905 case of Jacobson versus Massachusetts. Now that was a real doozy, a landmark Supreme Court case that really set the stage for what we're seeing today. The court basically said, hey, states have the power to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. It was all about smallpox back then, but it laid the groundwork for public health measures we see today. It's like the great granddaddy of vaccine requirement cases. While that may be true, Eric, we can't just dust off some century old case and act like it applies perfectly to today. Times have changed. - I understand your point, Kate, but the principles established in Jacobson are still relevant today. The balance between individual rights and-- - Oh, please, we're not living in 1905 anymore. Our understanding of individual rights and medical autonomy has come a long way since then. And let's not forget, this case isn't just about vaccine mandates. It's about potential fraud and directly impacting children's education. It's a whole different ball game. - Interesting points. How does the Jacobson versus Massachusetts case compare to our current situation? - Great question, Ted. You know, in both cases, we're seeing this tug of war between individual liberty and public health. It's like a century old dance that we're still doing today back in 1905. The court basically said, look, the government can make you get vaccinated for the greater good. Fast forward to today, and we're in a similar boat. It's all about making sure students are properly vaccinated to create this protective bubble in schools. It's like we're all in this together, you know? - But there's a crucial difference here that you're completely glossing over. In 1905, people were actively resisting vaccinations. Here, we've got families who-- - I see your point, Kate, but the core issue of public health protection remains the same. These families may be victims of fraud, but that doesn't change the-- - Doesn't change the need, are you serious? These families are victims of a potential crime, not some anti-vaxx crusaders. They believe their kids were vaccinated, only to have the rug pulled out from under them. How can you not see the difference? - You both make compelling arguments. Are there any other historical events that might be relevant to this discussion? - Oh, absolutely, Ted. Let's take a trip back to the 1950s and the polio vaccination campaigns. Now, that was a real game-changer. At first, people were a bit skittish about the whole thing. But then, as folks saw polio wreaking havoc left and right, public opinion did a complete 180, and get this. By 1979, polio was history in the US, all thanks to widespread vaccination. It's like we took this invisible enemy and just knocked it out of the park. - That's a completely different scenario, and you know it. The polio campaign was about introducing a new vaccine to fight a terrifying disease. This case is- - I understand their different scenarios, Kate, but the principle of protecting public health through vaccination remains the same. The polio campaign showed us. - You're missing the point entirely. This isn't about whether vaccines work. It's about due process and the right to education. These families are being punished for something that wasn't their fault. How is that fair? - This discussion has certainly given us a lot to think about. As we wrap up, I'd like to thank both Eric and Kate for their insightful contributions to this complex and important topic. It's clear that this issue touches on fundamental questions of public health, individual rights, and the role of education in our society. While we may not have all the answers, continuing these conversations is crucial as we navigate these challenges. Thank you for tuning in to Listen To, and we'll see you next time.