Navigating Suspension Orders

From the Officer of Health of Waterloo Region, via our Publicly Funded Schools.

This was to go out weeks ago, but *with* responses from the school boards regarding the suspension orders dispatched to thousands of households in early February. However, here we are on March 25th, and the deadline to resolve this issue looms just ahead, set for "before March 26th at 4:30 pm." Keep that date in mind; it will prove curious shortly.

I want to start by acknowledging that I don’t have ‘the answer’ for you. And that I hope that doesn’t deter you from continuing this read. I offer this perspective, not as advice but as a means of perhaps seeing things a bit differently. After all, a wise man once said: ‘The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”. I don’t know about you, but I want different results.

Let’s start from the beginning.

On February 1, 2024 the suspension order was generated.

On February 8, 2024, I received notification via notices sent home with my two sons. These notices did not come through Public Health; rather, they were directly disseminated by the school staff through my children.

I considered my options carefully. I delved into our rights and encountered murmurs suggesting that this order might be deemed invalid—with claims circulating that 'only the principal has the authority to suspend a child.' Other speculation arose as to whether this was linked to the aftermath of the cyber attack, potentially serving as a method to recover lost data.

With still very little information by Feb 21, 2024, I sent my sons’ principal the following correspondence:

Following this correspondence, I received the official notice from the Region of Waterloo Public Health and Paramedic Services:

Naturally, I looked into the Immunization of School Pupils Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.1. Considering I was in kindergarten back in 1990, it's understandable that this legislation hadn't previously crossed my radar. Now that it's being brought to my attention, let's take a closer look, shall we?

All in all, I've concluded that this legislation is unlawful, and consequently, I do not consent. And you know what's interesting about consent? It's revocable at any point. Let's entertain a hypothetical scenario where I (or you) agreed to this Act over three decades ago. However, if subsequent evidence emerges, leading one to question its fairness, validity, or legality,… guess what folks? – I can withdraw my consent at.any.time. And so can you!

I once believed that if I disagreed with legislation, opting for the 'exemption' route would be my way of demonstrating my non-compliance.

But now, I’m not so sure.

Wouldn’t abiding by the outlined demands still be complying?

And how about if I don’t answer at all - simply ignore it? That MUST be ‘showing them’ that I do not and will not comply.

Wrong.
I used to perceive our 'democracy' as a scenario where a vocal minority shouts 'NO,' another (louder) minority shouts 'YES,' and everyone else's silence was merely disregarded - as a non-vote, if you will. But that silence does count – and the default of saying nothing… is agreeing.

This can be deemed tres efficient —I mean, who wants the hassle of securing an *actual* majority vote for legislation to pass? That could take for.ev.er, which is precisely why we elect officials to represent us, isn't it?
They vote on our behalf. So, we vote... right?
Wrong.
In an ideal government system, perhaps that would hold true. Unfortunately, this is not the case, in our corrupt bureaucratic circus show set within a twilight zone of tyranny.

Think about all of the legislation that is passed that you don’t agree with. Now think of all of the legislation that you don’t even know about.
And THIS is a ‘free’ society?

The only way true liberation could be achieved is if individuals had the power to withdraw their consent from legislation they disagree with. You might argue that being part of a society entails considering the *collective* preferences and needs.
Fair enough! Show me, then, that the majority truly supports such legislation for the greater good. And in the meantime, demonstrate to me that what you're asking me to agree to is indeed safe.
I’ll wait.

In the meantime, I’ll live freely, thank you very much.

I've arrived at a newly formulated belief: any of the following actions would amount to agreeing with legislation that I, in good conscience, deem unlawful:

1.    Submit proof of immunisation
2.    Submit an exemption
3.    Do nothing (as I would be agreeing through acquiescence).

At this point I’d like to pause and have us check our biases.
Notice that I haven't disclosed whether my children are vaccinated. Did you come to your own conclusion on this with the only piece of knowledge you have (simply, that I oppose the Immunization of School Pupils Act)?
In your opinion, would it make a difference to my case whether or not I choose to get my children vaccinated? Should it?

Let’s proceed…

Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I found myself puzzled by the repeated assertion that 'the principal is the only one authorized to suspend a student at their school'—a fact I know to be true according to the Education Act. However, the suspension orders weren't originating from the principal; they were issued by the Officer of Public Health for the Region of Waterloo. One would expect the Education Act to provide clear guidance for principals regarding their duty to enforce such orders, but alas, it does not.
Is this duty assumed? Or is it merely a convoluted means of compelling principals to comply with a request they are not legally obligated to fulfill?
Does this suspension involve the voluntary participation of principals and parents?

On March 5, 2024 I had yet to hear back from my sons’ principal from my last correspondence on Feb 23, 2024, so sent them the following:

Here is a better shot of the two images that appear in the email:

Image 1: from the Education Act :

Image 2: from the Immunization of School Pupils Act :

Here is the correspondence that followed:

(Did you catch the importance of the March 26^th @4:30 deadline? I would say my appointment time with the superintendent was unbelievable, but unfortunately, it absolutely is.) We have yet to hear back.

So. Then. What am I doing?

Well. I served Hsiu-Li Wang, the Officer of Health, letting her know that I do not agree to the offer to contract. If you want to know more about that, please feel free to reach out.

We shall see what takes place on March 27, 2024 (Just two more sleeps).

What can you do?

You can follow suit by not complying to these terms.
Or, you may choose the exemption route.
Or perhaps you aren’t taking any action.
Regardless, we’d like to hear about your experience!

The exemption process:

You would need to obtain a medical exemption, which would require a physician or registered nurse in the extended class to complete a Statement of Medical Exemption; or, you would need to fill out a Statement of Conscience or Religious Belief.

The latter would need to be notarized (sworn or affirmed before a Commissioner for Taking Affidavits) which requires $20+/child and potentially an appointment with a lawyer or notary.

Note that the Statement of Conscience or Religious Belief requires you to sign off to the following statement:

“With the decision to delay or refuse vaccines, you are accepting responsibility that you are putting your child’s health and even life at risk.”

And let’s not forget the tried and true - don’t be so selfish:

”Delaying or refusing vaccines for your child also puts others at risk of illness, especially children and adults in cancer treatment, those with heart or lung disease or diabetes, newborn babies and the elderly. Communities depend on high immunization rates to keep vaccine preventable diseases from spreading. When more people are immunized, there is less risk for everyone.”

If someone truly agreed with such a statement, they probably wouldn't seek an exemption from receiving vaccinations, correct?

It's hardly surprising that Public Health has been inundated with these exemption forms, filled with strikes through incriminating and non-factual narratives. They're likely overwhelmed, unable to sift through them all before their March 26 at 4:30 pm deadline. Keep in mind, that a typical response from Public Health is the claim that they're rejecting your form, as they may perceive any alterations as tampering with a legal document.

You would also need to complete the ‘required immunization education session’ as demonstrated by submitting a copy of the ‘vaccine education certificate.’ Take a peek and let me know if this isn’t propaganda!

NOTE: If you still don’t know what to do with this – another option is to notify Public Health of your appointment date with your primary healthcare provider through the web form. This will result in a ‘temporary exemption’ which, in this case may be up to three months. (Yup, summer- summer-summertime). Whether this is delaying the inevitable, I do not know.

If on March 27th, staff from your child(ren)’s school states that your child(ren) are suspended. Perhaps consider getting it in writing from the staff/principal that is issuing the suspension. The WRDSB and PH have still not answered the questions on whether or not this would be a legal act.

In conclusion, I refuse to comply with legislation that my conscience deems unlawful, regardless of whether I opt for vaccinations for my children or not. Again, this is not advice but only a perspective. It's essential to recognize that not all legislation is inherently lawful, and not everything deemed unlawful is illegal. Let's reflect on how we contribute to the prevalence of unlawful legislation in our systems today. This impacts not only our interactions with one another and the experiences for our children but also encroaches upon our freedom of conscience and our free will.

Cristina Fernandes,
a parent of Waterloo Region (but a mother first).

Further information to consider:

Christine Colebeck has been helping Ontario parents navigate the vaccine exemption process for school children for over two decades. Watch Navigating the Ontario Exemption Process for School Children for:
1. A brief history of the Ontario Immunization of School Pupils Act (ISPA) legislation.
2. The ISPA exemption process and changes in 2017 regarding the self-incriminating affidavit.
3. Your legal rights regarding conscience/religious exemptions and your privacy.

Here is a ‘How to Get a Vaccine Exemption in Ontario for School Attendance’.