Delaying Vaccines Key Questions
The Assembly Health Committee today approved a bill that would make it more challenging for families to obtain a religious exemption from the law requiring their children to get vaccinations before they attend school. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes, File)
TRENTON — A bill that would make it more difficult for parents in New Jersey to cite religion as a reason for preventing their children from vaccinations cleared the second legislative committee in a week today.
People from across the state — most of them parents — filled two hearing rooms waiting for a chance to tell the state Assembly Health Committee how the legislation would violate their religious freedom as Americans. Some threatened to move out of state. Some said they would home-school their kids. Some vowed to break the law.
"I am begging you to stand with the people," said Maria Hildago Dolan, an attorney and a mother from Wall Township, who explained how her parents fled Cuba because of communism. "So many people (came) here to live in peace and to live in freedom. What is really going on here?"
The scene was similar on March 9 when the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee approved the same bill. Sponsors have said the legislation is driven by the concern of the measles outbreak at Disneyland infecting 117 people earlier this year.
Physicians have also taken note of the steady increase of students who have qualified for a religious exemption from vaccines required to attend New Jersey schools. Since 2008, parents and guardians need only to write a letter stating vaccines violate their religious beliefs. There were 1,641 students with a religious exemption in the 2005-06 academic year compared to 8,977 in the 2013-14 year, according to the state Department of Education.
"It's easier to get an exemption than it is to get a shot," said Drew Harris, a physician and chairman of the N.J. Public Health Institute, told the Assembly health committee as he urged lawmakers to pass the bill.
The bill (A1931) would require parents to obtain a notarized letter explaining "the nature of the person's religious tenet or practice that is implicated by the vaccination and how the administration of the vaccine would violate, contradict or otherwise be inconsistent with that tenet or practice."
The statement also must show the tenet "is consistently held by the person," and is not merely "an expression of that person's political, sociological, philosophical or moral views, or concerns related to the safety of efficacy of the vaccination."
Parents would also have to include in the statement they "understand the risks and benefits of the vaccination to the student and the public health and acknowledge the student may be excluded from attendance" by the state health commissioner in the event of an outbreak of a communicable disease, according to the bill.
Schools would be prohibited from allowing an exemption unless these new requirements are followed.
The two-hour hearing was dominated by the opponents — some of whom wept or yelled to make their point.
Sharon Gill of Chatham said she wasn't speaking on her own behalf because her children are vaccinated. "However, this government has no place making personal health care decisions for anyone."
Kathy Gizzo, a member of the Colts Neck Board of Education, said she was "concerned this bill will increase the likelihood of me and my fellow members to sit in judgment of others religious beliefs. I am neither interested nor qualified to make that judgment."
Committee Chairman Herb Conaway (D-Burlington) replied: "No one will be required to sit in judgment."
The legislation does not explain who is the final arbiter of a family's request for an exemption. The bill requires the state Health Department to develop rules to implement the bill.
"We've heard too many people playing politics with vaccinations, despite vaccinations having long been proven as a vital public health success story," Conaway said in a statement following the 9-1 vote with two abstentions. "In the end, the only thing government must balance is what's best for the overall public health, and that means unambiguously supporting vaccinations and making clear that any exemptions must be limited."
Assemblywoman Nancy Munoz, (R-Union), a nurse, voted in favor of the bill. "Too many children aren't being vaccinated, causing the return of some diseases such as the recent measles outbreak. Some parents may have a valid medical or religious reason for not vaccinating their child. This measure respects that decision while protecting the public," she said.
Note: This story has been corrected to reflect the requirement that parents' letters must acknowledge "the risks and benefits of vaccinations to their child and the public health," according to the bill. A letter from a physician is not required.
Susan K. Livio may be reached at slivio@njadvancemedia.com. Follow her on Twitter @SusanKLivio. Find NJ.com Politics on Facebook.