CHALLENGING MASK MANDATES IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Recently, I contacted the Superintendent of the Bethlehem Area School District in Pennsylvania Dr. Joseph Roy to express my support for dropping the mask mandates. In this video, I share what I wrote to him, and how he responded. The sample letter that anyone can use is posted in the comments section below:

Dear (Superintendent),

My name is (insert your name here), and I am a parent of a child who attends (name of school here).

I would like to discuss ways that the Health and Safety Plan may be suitably amended to accelerate the District’s return of students to school under normal conditions, that is, with masks optional, with minimal or no testing, and with a definite phase out of other restrictions. Please let me know if you are available for a conference. 

While I understand there are many variables that the School Board must factor into its Health and Safety Plan, I would like to discuss with the Board how the following factors may lead to a return to normal operations:

1. As you know, the American Rescue Plan, section 2001(i)(1), gives the School District wide latitude in developing its Safety and Health Plan, so long as it is directed to continuously and safely opening and operating schools for in-person learning. Beyond that, the Health and Safety Plan does not require particular measures, such as wearing of masks, testing, and other measures which depart from normal operations. 

2.  All COVID-19 masks, whether surgical, N95 or other respirators, are only authorized, not approved or licensed, by the federal government; they are Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) only. They merely “may be effective.” Federal law states:

     Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I-III) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act   (FD&C Act) states:

Individuals to whom the product is administered are informed—
           (I) that the Secretary has authorized the emergency use of the product;
           (II) of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent    
                to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and
           (III) of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the 
                 consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the  
                 alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.

3. With the Omicron variant data showing milder symptoms than Delta, no increase in hospitalizations, and with relatively fewer cases reported in school-age children, the health and safety of students, staff and community may be maintained without resort to masking and other measures which may impair our children’s learning or development. 

4.  Accordingly, transitioning away from outdated mitigation metrics and approaches may be accomplished with due consideration of local, district, and county incidence, hospitalization rates, vaccination availability and rates, and most notably, non-existent or de minimis incidents of in-school transmission. 

5.  EUA products are by definition experimental and thus require the right to refuse. Under the Nuremberg Code, the foundation of ethical medicine, no one may be coerced to participate in a medical experiment. Consent of the individual is “absolutely essential.”

It is important to continue to follow mitigation plans for COVID-19. We must also ensure that laws that guard and protect the bodily autonomy of our children are not ignored and violated by those in positions of authority. Any “mandate” or school policy requiring individuals to wear a face mask against their desire is a violation of the above-mentioned law.

I look forward to further, constructive discussions on addressing my concerns, rather than adversarial hearings or proceedings.
 

Sincerely,