California DPH Drops the Hammer on Medical Exemptions written by Disciplined Doctors

California DPH Drops the Hammer on Medical Exemptions written by Disciplined Doctors

I have just learned that the California Department of Public Health has contacted all the state’s school districts and informed them that all medical exemptions written by physicians who have been disciplined by the California Medical or Osteopathic Boards are revoked effective the beginning of the coming school year, 2021-2022 (or September 1, 2021, for child care facilities). Here is what the CDPH sent to the schools.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WxHhNDtsJGwQ9_YXTCkDkhTT03_Lrdtf/view?fbclid=IwAR1Gz54L6u71w8dJu6kPxYBWjwTJuDDpKMjuB6geY_p0vaiQGclVLXVAHfE

In addition, CDPH’s notice attached/contained a link to a 92-page list of the names of all the doctors disciplined by both boards. Here is that list.

2021MBC_OMBCDisciplinedDoctors(2)

If the doctor who wrote your child’s exemption is on the list, your child’s medical exemption will not be considered valid next school year.

I believe at least one other physician whose case was heard by an Administrative Law Judge in February will be added to the list by early summer. I also expect that one or a few other doctors will appear on that list prior to the start of the next school year. As of now, I am not seeing a viable judicial remedy to this situation.

Sorry, but there you have it.

Rick Jaffe, Esq.

7 thoughts on “California DPH Drops the Hammer on Medical Exemptions written by Disciplined Doctors

  1. Wasn’t the intent of the law to revoke exemptions by doctors who were disciplined for writing false exemptions? This (revoking exemptions by doctors disciplined for any reason) is different than that. Is the CDPH really untouchable when abusing their power?

  2. That list has over 8,500 doctors listed on it… how many doctors are even in California? Does no one see this as the witch hunt that it is? Is this truly acceptable to the general public? If this many doctors cannot be trusted by the CDPH to use their own medical judgement, maybe there’s a much bigger issue at hand.

  3. There is no coincidence this is being dropped right now while there is so much attention for the “Covid Vaccine”, I’m sure Pan is behind this.

    And to Daniel Harvitt, you’re exactly right, that wasn’t the intent and is not what Newsome thought he was signing. I’m a retired Consultant who served on several County panels for implementing of ordinances and I followed this very, very closely. The original law had the wording specifically stating disciplined for vaccinations and originally only on schools who had LESS than 95% vaccination, but Newsone thought the law was too strict and at the last minute he met with Pan and added that the child could finish the school he was in (i.e. if in second grade, he could go until Junior high).

    Unfortunatelly Pan slightly changed the wording on the discipline and removed the “for vaccine exemptions”. I freaked out, and immediately called and emailed my state senator and state assemblyman and the governor. But “the fix was in”, this was changed the night before implementation, the republicans asked for 2 weeks to review, and were overidden.
    I spoke with one doctor I know who issues exemptions and she said that I was right and the way it’s written, a doctor’s exemption would be disallowed if the doctor merely had his (or her) hand slepped for improperly charting!!

    The way it was written, it was to go into effect February of 2021 but I was told “on the side” that no school is taking the time to go through each and every exemption, and efforts of the State to get all records were fought while by “privacy issues” and the schools wouldn’t release.

    This has Pan’s fingerprints all over it, they are sending to every school with directions for them to scour files and if the doctor is on the list, your child is “out” by September.

    The proverbial “shi*&*t” will hit the fan when this goes out and the only hope will be a shocked and surprised masses start writing letters to the editor and complaining to the governor (who as I said never intended this), so hopefully the “glitch” will be fixed.

  4. Gary, thank you for sharing. I agree with Daniel Harvitt and R Smith. It is very concerning that CDPH seems untouchable!! It’s hard to believe that 8500 docs have significant disciplinary action against them! Possible to share effective verbiage that we can use for letters to the editor and Newsom?

  5. Are we all losing sight that government does not grant “rights? “Government rights” is a paradox since governments only grant privileges and benefits. People are born with rights. In other words, governments are instituted to protect those rights not usurp them. But that is just what government is doing and what the people seem to be allowing.

    1. nice words, but the practicalities are that if you want to use government benefits like allowing your children to be around others in public or private school, the government has the right to condition that privilege upon compliance with accepted public health mandates. That has been the law in states well before Jacobson and in every case since Jacobson. Your right extends to educating your child at home and does not extend to putting other children at risk, is how the government and the courts see it. I know you and everyone else reading this don’t agree with it, but that’s the government’s view accepted by the courts, at least until now.

  6. Rosanne, I agree with Mr. Jaffee. I worked for 40 years as a civil engineer, and perception of public safety always trumps rights. This has been an issue of property rights in California for the past 20 years. Right now people are being deprived of their rights to build due to fears of fire safety, perceptible contamination to groundwater, etc.

    The best arguement is the health damage to the children who would be booted out of school Studies are showing that homeschooled children during COVID are falling behind, suffering depression, losing social skills. Now these poor kids who have just suffered for on hear, are put back out on the street!

    And for what? Do Fauci says that 75% to 80% vaccinated or previously infected gets “herd immunity”. In a previous iteration of this new law, it exempted schools with a 95% vaccination rate (our school is 98%).

    So those are the arguements you use, not “government rights”, we lost that battle years ago!

Leave a Reply to Daniel Harvitt Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *