Durham Region's threat to banish students ignores Charter of Rights

This article by CTV reports that "more than 1,000 students in Durham Region could be suspended from school by next week if they can't find immunization records to prove they have received the necessary shots." The article reports that "letters sent home to parents in November said that Durham District School Board students whose vaccinations are not up to date will be forced to stay home. "

The article adds that The Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine does not agree with the hard line approach. Spokesperson Dr. Shehab El Hashemy says many people in his profession are against immunization.

Even if a student has been immunized, there is now a consequence for not reporting that fact to the Durham Health Unit. Often this is simply because of disorganisation or lack of prioritisation. If students have not been vaccinated, but their parents intended them to be, this threat really "lights a fire" under them, doesn't it.

Some may take issue with the enforcement based approach adopted by the Dunham Health Unit to encourage mass compliance with school board level vaccination rules. Are there better ways to bring about voluntary compliance? Perhaps. Can we assume such measures create compliance with rules are in the public interest and not in conflict with the rights of indicidual Canadians? That is the more challenging question.

What these letters to parents do not explain is that this consequence cannot apply to everyone because of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Article 15.1 guarantees equal protection under the law and equal protection of our rights. Equal protection includes freedom of religious or philosophical belief under article 2 section A and B.

As such, if one's religion, "belief system" or philosophy does not agree with the concept of mass immunization (like Dr. Shehab El Hashemy) for example, one is "off the hook" and cannot be prevented from attending school. So, in reality, these letters are only really applicable to those students and parents who have been too lazy to get shots or too disorganised to report it to the school board.

For some, compliance will be motivated by the fear of children potentially being sent home from school (or the associated and expected stigma). Those who do not understand their rights might just give in. Those who do understand their rights will have to demonstrate to the school board a religious or philosophical reason for them to grant an exception. Canadian school boards are fully aware of this and tend to face such challenges every year.

It is hard to say what will be the result of this "big threat" collectively. However, I am curious how big or small a mail campaign this would be if letters were only sent out to the disorganised relatives of lazy non-immunised Durham students.

What is the point of this exercise, really?