a lesson we all learned
as children right? ...or did we really?
'We don't take a side
until we've heard both sides'. 'Regardless of what we believe or the decisions
we make, we respect the difference in beliefs and choices of others'. 'If you
don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all'... right?
Quite frankly, I am over
hearing about and reading in my Facebook newsfeed these vaccination blogs and comments to articles that
continue to reinforce unnecessary tension among parents when it comes
to 'both' sides of the debate, which is really what it's become. But
it's not just any kind of debate, it's a hate debate
that's getting so old and exhausting.
With the exception of a few very well written blogs I've read (on both sides of the issue) there otherwise, seems to be very little constructive conversation going on; rather
ignorant opinion pieces fueled with resentment
and low blows for those making a different decision than their own.
This ought to go without saying that naturally most blogs are 'bias' as it is next to impossible to write a personal
statement of belief or decision without demonstrating one. But that does not mean that a bias need be so brutally offensive.
I do realize that the only way to avoid 'bias' altogether is to present 100% of the written content and/or resources provided to the issue at hand, 'fairly-and-squarely' side by side, without even a hint as to which 'side' the writer is on, but that is not my objective.
It is my hope nonetheless, that a constructive bias (however possible) would be demonstrated in this blog as I attempt, in some small
degree, to 'defend' the less-than-popular (minority) decision to opt out of
vaccines.
At best I can hope to be deemed 'half-bias' --to the extent that-- the only
'source' of information you will be directed to outside my own opinions and conclusions (should you choose
to follow the link provided) comes from a 100% unbiased, very reputable source shedding light equally to
both sides.
I should also emphasize that I wish not to convey the message that my personal conclusions are somehow the 'end-all-be-all' of authority on the matter. Though my tone, passionate by nature (to a genuine fault at times), may take on an absolute 'finality' so to speak, it is not with intention to diminish the research or rationale of all those people who are, without a doubt, even far more educated on both sides of this issue than myself.
I must be clear that what I aim to present here is only the less popular side to the 'two sides' of the story, assuming (perhaps too presumptuously) that it is the most unknown side of the story in the society/system we live and operate within. However, my heart would be sincerely troubled to know that anyone reading my words may take away from them any sense of being 'demeaned' or judged in their own personal choices.
To begin to shed light into my personal experience, I will say that I only became publicly
open with my decision after experiencing the bullying, I had only heard about, firsthand. After a slew of continuous sly and subtle verbal attacks for our
decision not to vaccinate our daughter, we were left with no other choice
but to 'fire' our pediatrician.
When I had presented this woman with the reputable sources/documentaries I had used to educate
myself on the matter, she had very little to say in response other than
continued demeaning comments: e.g.. "to us it's like putting a child in a
car without a car seat". What she was really saying was: "surely, no decent parent
would do such a thing". I found it disheartening that she could not direct me
to any useful resources of information or answer the most critical question I had; that is:
"We can go to the
grocery store and look at a label to see the ingredients and know for the 'most
part' (side-note: this opens a whole different can of worms we won't visit in this blog), what we are feeding our children; so that
begs the question: Why can't we expect the same in our pediatric
offices when it comes to vaccines? Please tell me, why have you not offered me
the 'full disclosure' of ingredients in these vaccines you intend on me agreeing to (accepting full liability) that will be directly injected into my child's bloodstream? ...This is a very valid
question that you have only shrugged your shoulders to and then you tell me that I
may as well put my child in a car without a car seat if I am not going to
vaccinate her."
After about our fifth
visit or so I realized that she most likely 'wanted' me to go and I couldn't
have been more ready to leave myself.
But this woman got me
thinking about the endless ways in which health practitioners (many
pediatricians), pro-vaccine bloggers, and the media rant off 'facts', however
based on faulty assumptions they may be, all in order to fulfill a very
lucrative systematic agenda. They use such scare tactics to sway the popular
vote in favor of a decision that continues to serve the profitable interest of
the 'economic system' in which we operate.
If only she had known that one of her very own assistants (a registered nurse)
had admitted to me in private that she comes from a family of doctors and
nurses, none of whom receive the flu shot or vaccinate their own children. Of course, I had no
intention of divulging this to the pediatrician.
The point is, I have
reason (as do many others) to find myself 'defending' this decision but (to reiterate) not with any remote
intention toward subjecting another to feelings of judgment for their own choices
or lending more fuel to a fire that is already far too inflamed. But
if there is one thing that those of us 'in-the-know' might all agree on, it is this:
However 'on-the-rise' the decision not to vaccinate has
become over the past two decades, it is still struggling to maintain balance on one
leg, in the heat of attack, against the mainstream push for vaccines and fewer available exemptions with a couple states (Mississippi and West Virginia) already experiencing the worst of it. Would you believe that parents in such places are actually being fined $100/day for every one of their child's missed days at school even though their child has showed up with a note from their doctor saying "she will die if she receives one more booster". It is criminalized in such places and a parent (not acting in 'obedience') takes the chance at being arrested and detained. How many of us even realize that these things have actually happened?
That said, and although
it is out of my control, I hope not (with this entry) to be
categorized as one of these 'extreme bloggers'. I have not set out to write this for the sake of 'controversy' but for the sake of injustice alone; lending a voice to the petition for 'change' in the way the entire system is operating on so many unethical levels. And even though we made a decision
one way, I'm tired of the antics among both groups of pro and anti- vaccine
movements.
The disrespect has not been one-sided. Among some anti-vaccine "extremists" I've seen statements like: "Go ahead and poison your child, don't expect me to do the same". To that, my jaw hits the floor.
I mean...Really!? Didn't your momma teach you anything!? "If you can't say anything constructive then (kindly) shut up, please and thank you."
Such hurtful verbal attacks only reflect ignorance. These 'extremist' attacks anger me just as much as the demeaning comments from some pro-vaccine 'extreme' proponents and media sensationalists and so I'm petitioning a new movement for the books: the 'Pro Parental Choice' movement; sign me up for that one!
In one of the most recent
blogs I've read, the author (a pediatrician) was advising parents on how to
"find out" whether or not their child's friend is vaccinated prior to
allowing their children to play together. She had a list of tactics and
one-liners for a 'polite' way of bringing it up to another parent.
Aside from the fact that
she fails to mention that diseases don't get passed along exclusively on
playdates--think schools, pools, airports, planes, playgrounds, libraries,
amusement parks, nurseries, daycares, grocery stores etc.; if her child is
vaccinated against a disease, how on earth does an unvaccinated child put hers
at 'greater risk'?
What this woman must not
realize is that her own reluctance in the efficacy of vaccines is demonstrated
in the plain fact that she is even worried about her children contracting those
diseases which they've been vaccinated for.
Vaccines either work or
they don't work and whether or not a child is exposed to another child
(vaccinated or not) should make no difference.
The reality is there is
no 'one-box-fits-all' when it comes to a child's health and strength of their
immune system which is why both vaccinated and unvaccinated children contract
the same diseases and get the same common
cold, flu, and other occasional health ailments.
I've met children who are
active and fed extremely wholesome, organic diets and are still chronically
sick with the flu, colds and allergies; where another child has an immune
system as solid as a rock and is rarely sick regardless of their diet and
physical activity or vaccination status. Hereditary and other environmental
factors should always be considered as well. There is no 'one' culprit to
diseases, disorders, and sickness.
But if we are really
doing our homework, the realization we should all have come to
by now is: 'Yes' when limiting the conversation to vaccines
and childhood diseases as they surface and spread, it is among (both) the
non-vaccinated and fully vaccinated alike. End of story.
Often times, though not
always, we've seen the fully vaccinated reported in much higher numbers than
those non-vaccinated cases. Take one of the more recent outbreaks of measles in
NYC for example in which 18 out of the 20 were fully up to date with their
shots; to emphasize here, only 'two' were not
vaccinated.
So in response to the
blog I read, there's simply no logic in the assumption that a vaccinated child
is at 'higher risk' because of his unvaccinated peer. It is completely
counterintuitive based on nothing more than scare tactics using 'herd
immunity' as justification.
To be truly substantiated, 'herd immunity' via
an ‘artificial process’ would have to be demonstrated in those countries where
vaccination rates are close to 100% and as a result we would see very few if
any outbreaks of disease.
This is not the case
however. Instead we see widespread disease outbreaks among children in such
countries, often with greater frequency. So this begs the question who/what is
to blame if there are no 'non-vaccinated' children around to pin it down on?
Herd immunity is only a
'theory' that in theory sounds good but has never
once been studied or proven as it pertains to vaccines. It is sadly nothing
more than a pro-vaccine, media-propaganda tool that holds absolutely no logical
weight when looking at real data.
True herd immunity, as many
doctors and medical health practitioners (including our own) agree upon, is
only really possible when a disease is acquired naturally by the ‘herd’.
I recently had a
conversation with one of my best friends who (unbeknownst to myself) had been
referred to the same pediatrician mentioned earlier.
When she told me about
her experience and the name of the pediatrician, I had to smile and shake my head.
This woman used the same one-liners on my friend as she had on me with little
support to back up her stance.
To reemphasize the disclaimers above; I am not on a mission to sway anyone's decisions
when it comes to vaccinations. The purpose of this blog, as my title suggests
quite literally, is to emphasize the truth of the old saying; there really
are "two sides to every story" and until you
understand both sides (especially the minority 'side'), you cannot fairly judge either way.
There are real 'warfare' tactics out
there when it comes to this topic; but I am asking 'why' must
it be this way?
The same friend told me
she didn't realize how bad the pressure and bullying was until experiencing it
for herself. They've already been through several pediatricians at this point
and their baby is under two months old. This is the sad reality for many
parents out there making the same decision to opt out of vaccinations. Some
pediatricians go as far as to actually refuse their services to such parents
and blatantly tell them to "leave" if they are going to "deny" their child "immunization" from "vaccine-preventable diseases".
Because to be 'vaccinated' is to be 'immunized' right?
To this I say, we have got to stop buying into this sensationalized, fairy-tale-ish "fact". We have got to stop throwing around these terms as
if they are synonymous with one another.
Immunization is the
process by which a person becomes immune to a disease. Vaccination is not a
guarantee of immunity and any immunity given is only temporary, as continuous
'boosters' are required for any possible effectiveness.There's a shelf-life to
vaccines, which means that most of us (as adults) are also 'at risk' of
infectious diseases as the majority of our population's 'herd' is currently 'unprotected'.
So do we call each other up and ask if we are all up to
date on our own "immunizations" before we get together for dinner and
cocktails (i.e. "play dates") with our guy/girlfriends? That seems
ridiculous, does it not?
Regardless of our varying beliefs and choices, we must be wise in those things that we choose to believe; to learn to recognize when something is instituted by fear and holds little to no evidence or logic in its application.
I am writing this blog to say that I personally believe "it's ok" to be
outspokenly passionate about whatever you believe in but do it with some class
and respect for the wide and diverse audience of people whom your words may
reach. Choose your words wisely and express your views without punishing
or attacking others for their own.
Whether we are the
parents to vaccinated or non-vaccinated children, we should count ourselves
blessed if they are healthy and happy and we should count ourselves lucky if
they don't contract any of the x,y,z diseases. And if they do, we are equally
blessed when they fight through it and recover like the champs they are.
The bottom line is we can
find research and studies to support almost ANY-thing. As a result, we will
continue to make different decisions and that's ok! We just have to put an end
to this 'hate' debate surrounding those decisions.
I only ask those who
haven't considered the other side of the story to take consideration. Perhaps
having done that we will, collectively speaking, become a little
more empathetic towards one another and do away with all the backhanded verbal
attacks and resentment.
For a wonderful non-bias,
highly-regarded and referenced site (referred to earlier) presenting straight-statistics and both sides
(equally) side-by-side, visit: Vaccine Pros and Cons at http://vaccines.procon.org/
According to
one statistic given on this site:
"About 30,000 cases
of adverse reactions to vaccines have been reported annually to the federal
government since 1990, with 13% classified as serious, meaning associated with
permanent disability, hospitalization, life-threatening illness, or death.
According to the CDC, infants (children less than one year old) are at greatest
risk for adverse medical events from vaccination including high fevers,
seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome. [23]"
These numbers may come as
a total shock to some of you reading this. Wouldn't we just naturally expect
our doctors and pediatricians to know these statistics and pass along this
vital information to us as we weigh the benefits and risks of vaccinating our
children, especially our infants, where "greatest risk"
is involved; Does this seem fair?
The sad reality is that the majority of pediatricians (even the very respectful
and empathetic ones), though we may expect them to know the whole story,
do not take the time to educate themselves beyond the information given to them
from the CDC and vaccine manufactures.
Our new doctor, a very sweet and supportive family practitioner (who admits to falling somewhere in the middle on the issue) has admitted to me the truth in the statement above. So, it has become our own responsibility to seek out both sides of the
bigger picture and learn how to distinguish 'facts', in real numbers,
from 'fiction', based on bias opinions or 'theories' that hold little to no
merit.
Those pediatricians and
doctors that have taken the time to research (beyond the
resources provided to them) after witnessing, for themselves, and validating
the claims (where most pediatricians won't) of far too many adverse, often
serious reactions to vaccines; those few, brave ones blowing the
whistle saying: "wait a minute, there's something seriously wrong
here"...let's just say, it has not come without a price
for them to pay.
I've read stories of
doctors and pediatricians alike whom after twenty years of providing routine
vaccinations, could no longer bring themselves to it. Upon bravely speaking out
about it, they become ridiculed and ostracized within the medical
community.
This is a serious issue, is it not? Where there is a strong and clear dissent
and disregard for such
reputable individuals speaking out (and legitimately concerned
parents) it should make it that much more clear that there is little regard for the best interest of the child. When we are not allowed to ask legitimate
questions or play devil's advocate and when we are not given a full
disclosure on the possibilities (listed on the vaccine inserts themselves) of
adverse reactions, our rights are being violated, bottom line.
There is, furthermore,
less concern for the best interest of our children as they are
perpetually thrown into the 'one-box-fits-all', with little to no regard for
overall family health history/candidacy for vaccinations without heightened
risk. To present any opposing view to that of the mainstream view, however
based on solid research it may be, is simply (to reiterate) unacceptable.
And so it stands to reason that a concerned parent is
only allowed to be concerned as long as that concern leads to the decision to
vaccinate their child.
There is such
little 'fair-game' being played all across the nation as parents choosing
to opt out are ruthlessly attacked for their decision, leaving these pediatric
offices in tears and self-doubt about their 'parenting' skills.
It is only with a sincere
attempt to stand in those shoes of the minority where such attacks can be felt
with empathetic concern, even for the parent, doctor, and/or pediatrician on
the very strong pro-vaccine side of the debate. It takes an honest, just individual to agree that there is
something fatally wrong with this picture.
I have to say that
although this topic is one I'm obviously very passionate about if only in the 'passionate' pursuit of respect for the freedom of choice, it is not without
having fully sought out both "sides" of the story. It is furthermore,
with the utmost care that I continue to advocate it is our
personal right as parents to make those medical decisions for
our own families without being bullied and/or pressured about the decision,
whatever that decision may be.
So being the 'run the numbers' kind of girl that I am, I
have to take it upon myself to look at such numbers and make sense of them if I
will have any 'real' defensive ground to stand on in this ridiculous fight for
'choice'.
Breaking it down:
*30,000 cases of adverse
reactions have been reported every year for the past 24 years and I know these
numbers represent a fraction of the total number of actual cases that go
unreported.
*Sticking with these
numbers alone however, 13% of those 30,000 cases (or 3,900 people) every single
year are experiencing severe, irreversible injury, life-threatening illness, or
death from one or multiple vaccines.
The argument to this on
the 'pro' vaccine side of the coin is that these numbers may not always reflect
actual vaccine-related reactions but may rather be "coincidental"
with the timing of an administered vaccine or otherwise, the effect of
"some other health issue". The key word being 'may'.
Regardless of this
rebuttal (which may or may not be the case for a portion of
the numbers) these are, nonetheless, real numbers
reflecting real people who really believe
that their loved one's injury, irreversible brain damage, or (worst of all)
death was caused by a vaccine or multiple vaccines administered at once.
This should go without
saying that Big Pharma is now enjoying a $36 billion dollar vaccine market and over $2 billion dollars, by 2010, had been paid out in
compensations to such families. Where we stand four years later is unreported, yet we continue to be told and regurgitate that
"there's no proof". "Vaccines come with a very small risk." "Vaccines save lives." "Vaccines are safe and effective" As a 'numbers' girl, I must beg the question;
"if there's no proof and all these pro-vaccine claims are so self-evident, then what
do all these 'numbers' mean?"
And just to be sure, I
had to (in my own attempted calculations) apply this percentage (taking into
account the much smaller population of unvaccinated children) to what we might see as far as unvaccinated reports go.
This is tough to do without complete data on unvaccinated statistics for the
past 24 years but ‘rough’ figures may be applied with the current
population records we have access to and the national percentage (1.8% ) of vaccine
exemptions we are currently seeing in schools to find some sort of numbers to work with.
Using this same
conservative percentage of 1.8% we may ‘roughly’ apply it to those aged
0-14 of the population, the time frames in which childhood diseases typically strike; when children receive the majority
of routine vaccinations. In turn, we may safely-assume such the age-group as 'likely' to make up the majority
of those cases reported for adverse vaccine reactions.
I won’t bother with all
the math (feel free to run your own numbers and object to mine) other than to demonstrate the answers I
arrived at.
In the U.S. we live in a population of 316,128,839 people with
61,089,123 between the ages of 0-14.
Should we take the figure
of 30,000 reports/year for the past 24 years to find a percentage in search of comparable statistics
for the unvaccinated population using the 1.8% national exemption rate figure; in other words: take the 1,099,604 out of the total 61,089,123 of ages
0-14 exempting from vaccines and we would get a .0005% rate of reports.
Apply this percentage proportionately over the same
amount of time (24 years) and we should expect to see a minimum of 549 reports per
year with 71 (or 13%) classified as “severe
illness, irreversible brain damage/injury, or death” among the unvaccinated.
We're not exactly talking 'apples for apples' (as many other factors would have to be examined) so clearly this is all
very relative and only ‘rough’ estimated figures to compare to--where data is unavailable, but it serves as a decent starting point.
And I
only know the data is unavailable after hours of sincerely scouring not
only this ‘ProCon’ site (where one may expect to find such information), but
the internet at large for real numbers (not just studies comparing health) of unvaccinated
injuries and deaths 'from disease' in healthy children (e.g. where a child's immune system was not previously compromised) in the U.S. over the past two decades. If it exists at all, I cannot seem to find the data.
Likewise, I also can't find any point in history where we have ever been
exposed to five diseases at the same time, which makes the practice of
administering multiple vaccines in one dose all the more questionable.
So it may stand to reason that if it is 'truly' that unsafe for a parent to choose not to
vaccinate their child, and if we are putting our child 'at risk’ by leaving
them ‘unprotected’, then surely we should have some sort of statistics for the unvaccinated over
the past two decades to support such a claim, especially in lieu of the plethora amount of
pro-vaccine propaganda we are bombarded with on a regular basis.
Furthermore logic would (then) have it, that a very fair (however unproven) assumption would be to say that most
non-vaccinated children contracting such x,y,z childhood diseases (at least in
the past 24 years) must
be (first and foremost)
pulling through and recovering from them naturally and without any severe
health complications, building life-long immunity in the process; and
(secondly) they are most certainly not posing any threat to
society and vaccinated children alike. In this regard (and strictly looking at the reported numbers available for my 'own' calculations) the risks that vaccines pose (as they currently stand) seem far too great.
Now I am not necessarily "anti" vaccine so much as I am "pro"-safety. If there were no such annual reports for adverse vaccine reactions (namely death) and if everyone receiving vaccines were benefiting in overall health and wellness, I would be the first one pulling up my sleeve. But in light of the substantial, arguably insane increase in vaccine profits (which doesn't serve the interest of my child in any way) and the fact that the routine schedule has increased (drastically) from my generation, in numbers and doses administered, the efficacy and necessity of such an overload should most definitely be challenged, if not on the grounds of 'morality' alone.
Many parents (even
personal friends of mine) have stated in their pro-vaccine stance that
"having done a great deal of objective research" they strongly
believe "the benefits of vaccinating a child far-outweigh the risks".
Although I may disagree, I can fully respect the belief/decision nonetheless.
I can more so respect the
fact that they've actually taken the time to educate themselves which is really
the greatest aspect of my 'proposed' 'Pro Parental Choice' movement.
But I ask that those of
us who have also spent hours educating
ourselves on both sides and rationalizing the data beyond facts and studies on both sides; those of us
choosing to opt out as result--I only ask that we are given the same
respect.
Those who have truly done their homework would likely agree that there is a plethora of invaluable research that has been
done on both sides of the coin and no 'one' exclusive way to analyze it all.
As I’ve attempted to
present my own form of ‘rationalizing’ based on those reported numbers we've seen in the past 24 years, my hope has been to
demonstrate that the decision (in the same way as those who've made the opposite
decision) was not made without taking the necessary time to weigh the benefits
vs. the risks.
Most importantly, and to continue reiterating, I hope it's clear that my own openly-shared stance on the issue
is merely intended to 'defend', not to condemn or guilt anyone for their own personal decisions. I am
all about the advice that simply says "do the research and follow your own
intuition."
But it can be very confusing to take in all the different information and
endless 'studies' available, with regard to the decision to vaccinate our
children. Many become overwhelmed and have no idea what to do with it all
which is why (as parents) we really must learn (to some degree) to tune out the
'noise', seek answers for ourselves, and trust our own instinct
when it comes to what is best for our own babies. Most
importantly, we must be willing to talk about it constructively and choose to
support each other no matter what our difference in opinions/decisions may be.
All said, I do not expect
every parent to rationalize in the same way, especially considering the fact that I just don't know which sources are being considered in the process, nor is it any of my business. At the risk of sounding too presumptuous, I do feel that many parents believe they have to have their school-aged kids vaccinated (even if they would've chosen differently) because "it's a requirement".
This is sadly another misconception perpetuated by 'words' like "mandated" vaccinations and by individuals such as school nurses and those working within administration departments. Such people are placing just as much pressure on parents as many 'bully-type' pediatricians and (believe it or not) even worse.
Across the nation a handful of schools have gone to the extent of deceitfully administering vaccines without parental consent and these poor kids are left feeling the pressure to submit to authority without anyone acting in their defense. A portion of those severe adverse reactions reported have happened in such an environment. I've read one too many personal accounts of such and it is painfully disheartening to hear about.
However, with the exception of a couple states, religious and philosophical exemptions are still available and fairly easy to acquire.
Nonetheless, whatever our decisions 'would be', 'would've been' 'could be', should be irrelevant to anyone but ourselves and our own families. God has given us all
charge over our own brood and entrusted us to make our 'own' decisions for
them. And so, by our own (individual) faith,
influences, education, and intuition we are inevitably bound
to make different choices.
In the end, it's not a
game of 'right or wrong' decisions; or the 'right or wrong' side of the fence
to be standing on. It's a call to be loving and empathetic for one another
regardless of our different decisions. It's about our higher calling
to extend the same grace and respect for everyone alike and this calling
applies in all areas of our lives; global policies, social welfare, politics
included. It's not limited to the issue of vaccinations. It's applying the
simple 'Golden Rule': "Do unto others as you would have them
do unto you".
We can and should fight
for those things in which we strongly believe in; but we must keep love and
respect for each other at the forefront of those battle grounds. For me, this
'fight' is not about anything more than the fight for my constitutional 'freedom
of choice' (as stated throughout) so long as that choice has not been proven harmful to
anyone else.
In the push for mandated
vaccinations with fewer and limited available exemptions extreme pro-vaccine
proponents continue to argue the case that "unvaccinated children pose a
major health threat to society." However such claims are only 'claims'
that have never been substantiated with the support of anything close to 'solid' evidence. This claim is most certainly a biased and faulty one lacking any true merit or credibility.
Those (independently funded) researchers that have studied large samples (up to 13,000) of the unvaccinated populations have produced results showing the very opposite: that is; unvaccinated children tend to have significantly fewer health issues than their counterpart with very robust immune systems, experiencing more mild symptoms during seasonal health ailments and disease outbreaks.
This type of study is something that the government/ CDC refuses to do for "unethical" reasons stating it would be wrong to intentionally leave a child 'unprotected' for the sake of a controlled study. However, it is well known (to us and them) that we have more than enough parents around the world (having already made the decision not to vaccinate) more than willing (begging at this point) to participate in such a study.
I will end on this note.
We all love our kids. We all want the best
for them. We are all doing the best we know how and we all deserve
the same respect and 'right of choice.' So, regardless of our own personal
position on the issue, can we choose to be fairly and
equally informed? http://vaccines.procon.org/ Can
we choose to understand and respect the "two sides of the story"
so we might finally call "truce" on this whole hate-debate and make
peace with one another?
Can we choose to stand up for one another regardless of our beliefs and choices; to be a voice for those in need of one?
If there is one promise I can make to anyone reading this; I personally vow to be your loudest and/or 'echoing' voice when it comes to any form of injustice you have (without a choice) been forced to fight against.
With all my kindest regards and ultimate hope for the peace, equality, love and respect this world (desperately) needs more of.
And Happy, Healthy Wishes
To You and Yours,
Sincerely ...
