First they come for the children, next it will be your guns. Arm youself before it’s to late.

My wife is having those hot flashes happening, I wonder if they would come and confiscate her........

Not sure how the lack of vaccinations were relevant to the story. Maybe "those people" deserve to be treated more poorly by the Feds?

Not sure either. They throw it in after saying the child has a high fever.
With that said, I'd rather they send someone to take the child to the ER rather than let the parents choose not to.
But drawing guns??

I guess it would depend on the disposition of the father after the 1st interaction with police.

Yeah, I agree that what orphious said would matter on the drawing guns.

It seems like our education system focuses too much on our rights to not cooperate with the police. We've got to be careful as a society because somehow the narrative gets corrupted from "you have your rights, and you may resist" to "you should resist". That's especially likely to turn out poorly when there's some fine print associated with the "you may resist" part of a particular situation.

I agree and this is what I don't understand. You are always going to loose in an interaction with the police if you resist, always...end of discussion, drop the mic. The only real question is how badly you are going to loose.

The time to argue about it is the next morning in the chief's office with your lawyer present.

Matt

“All because of a fever,” Boca said. “It’s absolutely ridiculous.” It's not like it was a 100 degree fever, is was 105, that's very high and dangerous. The part in the article that caught me though was the fever broke and it seems the doctor knew the fever broke but wanted the boy taken in anyway. If the boy was so critical, why didn't the doctor immediately take the boy to the ER himself or call the cops from his office before the parents left? Why did he wait if it was such as emergency?

Regardless, the idea you have to follow every order by the cops is ridiculous and just wait until the next day to get it all sorted out. Shouldn't the cops have to do everything in their power to make sure they are doing the right thing in the first place? These cops did take the time to get a warrant but the article didn't say the man drew a gun or did not respond appropriately to the warrant, why did they have to approach with guns?

With all that being said, the parents are idiots for not vaccinating the kid.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Because the doc does not have the right to do so. He needs parental consent to treat because the parents are available.
In life threatening situations, if neither parent or next of kin is available, you can treat a minor under 16 without consenting.
But in this case, he had no way to do so.

I live in Chandler. I don't want to suggest that everybody here has multiple weapons but...they do.

---

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

I didn't realize this, thanks for the information.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

But fundamentally I agree that it’s problematic. Kind of like vaccinating your kids or not.
If a 3yo is bleeding out and the parents say let’s wait for god to do something about it, there is little that can be done outside of an ER dept. in the ED I’m sure most docs would push parents out of the way and deal with the legal crap later. I hope anyway.

The article does state the father refused the police in their first attempt to see the kid. Then, they got a warrant and went in w/ guns drawn. So, let's play this out differently:

1) The father allows the police to see the kid on the first visit and make an assessment and/or deal with the medical issue when a doctor called and said the kid required immediate medical attention;
2) The father takes the kid to the hospital after first police contact;
3) The father refused (as he did) before the warrant and sat armed with a gun waiting for the police to breach the home - father is shot and killed;
4) The police blow it off and don't attempt to get a warrant and forcibly remove he kid for medical attention and the kid dies. The media is now reporting that a doctor advised DCS that the kid was in a serious medical emergency and the police left it to the father. The police are now the bad guys.

Given the scenarios - it would've been best for the father to be responsible and get the kid checked. Short of that, this scenario that unfolded is acceptable to me.

Didn't the father refuse to consent to the treatment/evaluation of the child? Yet the govt. authorities stepped in and forced it with guns?

These are separate issues.
The parents have the right to refuse to consent but if there is a real reason that a life is endangered the doc has the right to appeal to LEO on the grounds of child endangerment, in a possible life threatening situation. What’s unusual is that these things typically happen in the ED.

In all my education I never got any instructions on how to interact with the police. It's my understanding that resistance to police is far more cultural than institutional. E.g. cultural in some black communities, in some rural white communities (the Bundy ranch, etc.

https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/...ing-measles-outbreak

So...yeah...welcome to NYC, where Measles was basically non-existent.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

Yeah. That's pretty much the same point I'm trying to make. Education in that area was all about rights. I never got instructions on how to interact with police either. That makes it culturally easier to continue to take the "rights against authority" path towards non-cooperation -- which many people around me, at least, were somewhat fascinated with.