SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California lawmakers this year set out to advance bills that would require COVID-19 vaccines for more people and would make them easier to access.
They have largely failed on the vaccine mandate front.
This spring, Sen. Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, and Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland, pulled bills that would have required vaccines for all California workers and would have added the COVID-19 shot to a list of immunizations students need to attend school.
Now, just one major vaccine bill remains. The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved Senate Bill 866 from Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco. Wiener’s measure would let children and teens 12 and older get all vaccines approved by the Food and Drug Administration without needing parental consent.
Wiener has pitched this bill as a way to expand shot access for (mostly) teens with parents who are anti-vaccine, or whose work or other obligations may prevent them from taking their children to get immunized.
Conservative and anti-vaccine groups have turned out in strong opposition to Wiener’s bill.
They say it robs parents of their ability to participate in their children’s medical care and positions vulnerable children without fully-developed brains to be coerced and lured into getting shots that could negatively impact their health.
Claim:Children as young as sixth graders will be able to get vaccines without parental consent if SB 866 becomes law, the California Family Council said in its newsletter.
Rating:True
Details:Wiener and bill supporters want to allow minors as young as 12 to get vaccines without seeking permission from their parents.
The senator argues children in that age group already have the right to make certain medical decisions, including those who have experienced domestic violence or are seeking to treat or prevent sexually transmitted diseases.
Children and teens 12 and older can already consent to receive Human Papillomavirus (HPV) and Hepatitis B vaccines, for example, according to a Senate Judiciary Committee analysis.
SB 866 proponents — including the California Medical Association and Teens for Vaccines — say children in this age group already participate in medical decision-making. The bill doesn’t require doctors and medical providers to administer vaccines to teens whose parents are not present.
Opponents said parents are better-positioned to discuss their child’s medical history with a health care provider.
____
