By Rosanne Lindsay

Can people live in a free society without informed consent?

Most people would say no. Informed consent infers that at every fork in the road you have a choice. Most Americans want choice, right?

Wrong.

In 2010, Obamacare forced American citizens to purchase medical insurance–a federal mandate under the Affordable Care Act. The law requires that  every American who does not buy health insurance pay a penalty. By law, decisions have been taken away from patients, such as choosing a doctor, with other decisions being forced upon them. Did the people revolt?

No.

Then, in 2015, California Senate Bill 277 removed the personal belief and religious vaccine exemptions, creating a vaccine mandate that requires all California public school children to comply with the CDC schedule of vaccines. Did Americans rebel?

A few Californians did.

However, the majority of Americans sank into their sofas and turned the channel to Reality TV. Few people spoke up to say that both laws are unconstitutional. Fewer questioned whether due process was followed under what appeared to be national experiments toward eventual International Treaty Law, such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, or the UNCRC.

Instead of marching in the streets to reclaim inherent rights–rights granted by the Creator and by virtue of your birth–some people attempted to undo the ‘undue process’ through the court system. However, asking for permission for inherent rights, from an entity that can neither grant nor deny such rights, is futile. The time and energy alone to fight for what is already yours is draining and meant to distract you from understanding that your freedom to choose comes from nature’s laws, not man’s.  However, if history is any indication of what is to come, most people will turn the other cheek–on the sofa–flip the channel, and resign themselves to less freedoms. At least they have their remote control.

Bye-bye informed consent, bye-bye freedom!

Note: Mandates do not exist in a free society. Under mandates, a constitutional republic shifts to a democratic socialist state, where all rights are forfeited.

Hello To Democratic Socialism

Based on the attitude of many Americans, from Millennials to Liberals, the idea of democratic socialism is a welcome change. The trends away from capitalism to communism or fascism has come about under a slow boil. Suddenly capitalism has become a dirty word. Individuality is out, conformity is in. Peace is out, war is in. Borders are out. Illegal immigration is in. Gender is out. Non-gender is in. It’s a whole new world. If you blinked, you missed the transition.

For those who have not looked up the definitions for themselves, democratic socialism is the antithesis of capitalism. In a socialist state, all property is owned by the “public,” i.e., the state. Your body is no longer your property.  Therefore, there is no need for informed consent.

What Is Informed Consent, Anyway?

Informed Consent is permission granted by an individual–you –based on the knowledge of the possible consequences.  A patient gives a doctor permission for treatment with full knowledge of the possible risks and benefits.

However, under mandates, risk vs. benefit becomes a moot point since the state is in full control of your wellbeing. After all, the state tells you it is looking out for “your best interests” and for “the good of all,” and you believe.

The American Medical Association’s (AMA) website defines Informed Consent under the Code of Medical Ethics.  According to the AMA’s website:

“Physicians should take certain steps to ensure a patient provides informed consent for recommended treatments.”

The AMA Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 2.1.1: “patients have the right to receive information and ask questions about recommended treatments so that they can make well-considered decisions about care. Successful communication in the patient-physician relationship fosters trust and supports shared decision making.”

What is the quality of information provided under the AMA definition? In Wisconsin, AB 139 has two important elements. It establishes a “reasonable physician” standard for what information should be provided to the patient. The bill also states clearly that a physician need not provide a patient with information about alternate modes of treatment for conditions the physician already has ruled out.”

Reflect Before You Inject

What a physician determines to be “informed consent” may be a watered down version of the information you need to know. For instance, the 8X11 informational sheet provided at a “wellness” visit for vaccinations is not a full disclosure of risk by any stretch of the imagination. The information provided does not identify:

  • the ingredients in a vaccine,
  • warnings that injury or death may occur.
  • studies showing dangers of vaccines given singly or in combination and how they act at a molecular level on the body.
  • that vaccination is a medical procedure that is experimental each time it is performed on an individual since there are no long-term studies showing safety or efficacy.
  • that there can be no guarantee that the deliberate introduction of killed or live microorganisms into the body of a healthy person will not compromise the health or cause the death of that person either immediately or in the future.

Few people request the vaccine package insert, which provides the true dangers and warnings to health, and also serves to legally protect the vaccine makers. In fact, if you understand that there is no liability to vaccine makers for damage resulting from their products based on a law called The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, then there is no incentive to make a safe vaccine. Therefore, if you have not read through the package insert before you choose to say yes to a vaccine, be ready to assume all the risk. Reflect before you inject.

Consent By Proxy

To add to the confusion, guidance documents, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics’ Consent by Proxy  suggest that consent can be given by proxy for non-urgent pediatric care when minor-aged children are brought to a pediatrician for non-urgent acute medical care by someone other than their custodial parent or guardian (i.e., grandparent or aunt). Generally, if both parents have equal right to consent, a physician need only obtain consent from one parent. However, in the case of divorce, joint legal custody may require both parents give consent and be informed about their child’s medical needs. This guidance also addresses the liability and legal risks physicians incur when providing non-urgent medical care to patients without obtaining the required permission or consent.

Take The Bull By The Horns

Informed consent is written to benefit those in a position of power. So why not let it be you? Those who own the narrative control the outcome. Since there is no consistent language for informed consent, either between states, or between patient and doctor, it is important to do your own research. Anyone can do a search to discover the information presented herein. Know your rights if you are part of the medical system or any system. If you choose to be patient, or become a patient, it may be beneficial to ensure your file contains a Declaration of Rights. Such a document is similar to a Birth Plan to lay out your expectations and preferences. The point is to be clear. Although it is not legally binding, here is one example:

John Robert Doe’s DECLARATION OF PATIENT RIGHTS

Please insert the following statement into my medical record:

As the patient in our doctor-patient relationship, I am entitled to the right of informed consent.1 To make an informed decision regarding the tests, treatment or medication I receive, I need to know both the benefits and the risks. This would include the side effects or adverse reactions of any medication – including vaccines – that you might prescribe.

I also reserve the right to seek a second opinion.

My refusal of any test, treatment or medication should not be charted as me being non-compliant, but as me deciding the benefits don’t outweigh the risks.

NOTE: You can use this declaration to defend against any accusation of failure to adhere to the current “standard of care,” should I refuse any procedure or treatment considered “standard of care,” which many physicians have concluded are not always the best course of action for ALL patients.2

For your protection, keep a copy of this declaration in your personal office files.

John Robert Doe______ April 8, 2018__

Name Date

1 For confirmation see: https://medlineplus.gov/patientrights.html

2 For confirmation see: Modern Medicine at the Crossroads ; Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Fall, 2015

A Declaration of Rights is your energy stamp, if nothing else. If you sign any documents prepared by your provider, expect to play by their rules. Sometimes it is best not to sign anything not prepared by your hand.

Got Health Freedom?

In a world where restrictions outweigh freedoms and risks overtake benefits, where Medical Kidnap occurs daily, you can always choose to withdraw consent. You can also refuse to be a part of a system that claims to own your body. There are plenty of alternative options when it comes to health and healing. Health Freedom means that in order to have health, you must have freedom, and in order to be free, you must have your health. If you don’t defend your rights, expect to lose them. If you chose to forfeit your rights to the state, then forget what you read here since you won’t be making any decisions for yourself.

Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopath and Tribal healer under the Turtle Island Provider Network. She is President of the National Health Freedom Coalition and author of the book The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet. Find her on Facebook at Rosanne Lindsay and Natureofhealing and consult with her (Skype or Zoom consults available) at natureofhealing.org, where this article first appeared.



Credits:

Original Content Source