Why Choice?

  • Studies comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated populations demonstrate that the unvaccinated are healthier than their vaccinated peers

  • In 2018, Vermont babies are expected to get 38 vaccine doses for child care, unless parent files an “exemption“; this includes vaccines for sexually transmitted diseases in infants, and for chickenpox. Dozens more shots are recommended for teens.

From 1979 until 2012, Vermont state law provided for informed consent — and parents could freely exercise their moral, philosophical or religious beliefs rights.

The process was: “I request that following immunization(s) be waived because they conflict with free exercise of religious rights and /or moral (philosophic) rights.” Parents signed a simple written form.

This is because vaccination is a medical procedure that can cause untoward effects, including encephalopathy (which can lead to permanent brain injury) and death. In the US, health damage (including death), caused by vaccination resulted in many lawsuits against vaccine makers (drug makers), until they claimed a crisis and were shielded from liability in an act of US Congress in 1986 (- for more info., see Harvard publication here).

The National Childhood Injury Act of 1986 granted economic immunity to pharmaceutical companies for injuries caused by their vaccines[1]. The 1986 Act thereby eliminated the market force that drives safety for all other products – actual and potential product liability. Today, should injury occur, it falls entirely on the parents of a child to petition the government and prove the vaccine caused the injury.

No liability for harm

One major reason there should be choice is that at this time, drug companies have no liability for the harm cause by their vaccines, and thus no incentive to make safer vaccines. In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the liability shield enjoyed by pharma, and also said that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe[2].

Provided the product is properly prepared and accompanied by adequate warning

Each vaccine product is different. Each vaccine comes with inherent risk and as such, is accompanied by warning information in vaccine package inserts, which are regulated by the FDA.  Although most people believe the science is settled and vaccines are perfectly safe, drug (vaccine makers) do provide consumer product warnings inside “package inserts” for each vaccine. In the US, the FDA regulates the contents of these package inserts (labels) that accompany the product to the doctor or health department office. From these FDA regulated labels, one can plainly see that there is evidence of severe, life threatening side effects or, in some cases the risks have not been evaluated, for every vaccine approved by the CDC[3].

Reactions are reported, but largely ignored and not publicly  known to have occurred

According to the CDC, approximately 30,000 vaccine adverse event reports are filed each year to the US government. About 85-90% of the reports describe mild side effects such as fever, arm soreness, and crying or mild irritability. The remaining reports are classified as serious, which means that the adverse event resulted in permanent disability, hospitalization, life-threatening illness, or death[4].

Those injured by a vaccine must petition US government “special masters” for compensation and prove their injury was caused by a vaccine (see vaccine injury table). Federal government payouts for vaccine injury and death as of June 2017 total $3.7 Billion[5].

[1] National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-1 et seq. http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/vaccine-program-readmore

[2] Bruesewitz v. Wyeth https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf

[3] US Food and Drug Administration, Vaccines Licensed for Use in the United States https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm093833.htm?mc_cid=507bfbc377&mc_eid=d9ddda5b75

[4] US Center for Disease Control (CDC)


[5] National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) Statistics Report, June 2, 2017 https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/vaccinecompensation/data/vicpmonthlyreporttemplate5_1_17.pdf


The right to informed consent to any medical intervention that can kill or injure you or your child is a human right.

Consider for example the United Nations Universal Declaration on Bioethics Article 6 – Consent, –  which states:

1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.

2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice. Exceptions to this principle should be made only in accordance with ethical and legal standards adopted by States, consistent with the principles and provisions set out in this Declaration, in particular in Article 27, and international human rights law.

3. In appropriate cases of research carried out on a group of persons or a community, additional agreement of the legal representatives of the group or community concerned may be sought. In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent.


written by: Jennifer Stella