When Consent Isn’t Optional: A Greensboro Story That Hits Home
As someone who has taught and loved children for decades—especially those navigating the world a little differently—I can tell you this without flinching: it is never okay to override a parent’s right to make medical decisions for their child. Not in a school. Not in a clinic. Not under the guise of "doing what’s best."
But that’s exactly what allegedly happened to a 14-year-old Guilford County student in 2021, when he went in for a COVID-19 test and walked out with a Pfizer shot he and his mother did not consent to. According to court records, he verbally declined the vaccine. His mother was not there. And yet—he was vaccinated anyway, during a school-affiliated event, under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) product that, under North Carolina law, required written parental consent.
Let that sink in. Because it's not just a legal story—it’s a moral one. And a personal one.
Why This Case Matters (and Why I’m Watching It)
This month, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that the case—Happel v. Guilford County Board of Education—can proceed. In a 5–2 decision, the court said the PREP Act (a federal law that shields companies from liability during public health emergencies) does not protect people or organizations from state constitutional claims—especially not ones involving bodily autonomy or parental rights.
As a former special education teacher, a small business owner, and someone who works with families across all walks of life, this ruling affirms what I’ve always believed: parents are not optional. They’re not a checkbox to skip. They are central to any decision involving a child’s body and future.
My Position Since Day One
From the very beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, I have stood firmly for informed consent—not just as a concept, but as a daily practice. I’ve lived through COVID-19 twice. I’ve cared for people who got very sick, and others who didn’t even know they had it. I chose not to get vaccinated with an experimental mRNA shot because I listened to my body, read widely (books like Dissolving Illusions and The Real Anthony Fauci shaped my understanding), and questioned the very narrative that was pushed without room for discussion.
“Trust the science,” they said. But what they really meant was, “trust our version of it.” There was no room at the table for people like me who asked about natural immunity, long-term safety, or the financial influence of Big Pharma. When corporations are the ones underwriting the studies and writing the policies—well, that’s not science. That’s marketing.
The Bigger Picture: Bodily Autonomy Is Not a Single-Issue Slogan
You can’t shout “My body, my choice” in one arena and then turn around and shame, silence, or override people when they apply that same principle elsewhere. It doesn’t work like that. If you believe in bodily autonomy, you believe in it for everything—vaccines, reproductive choices, medical treatments, you name it.
And I say this as a taxpayer and as someone deeply engaged in my community: the organizations we fund—schools, health departments, boards of education—owe us truth, transparency, and accountability. Not cherry-picked data. Not intimidation. And definitely not secret backroom deals that favor campaign donors and pharmaceutical giants.
What the Law Says in North Carolina (Because Yes, It Matters)
Under N.C. General Statute § 90-21.5, minors may consent to treatment for reportable diseases—but as of August 20, 2021, state law requires written parental consent for any EUA vaccine, including the COVID-19 shots that were administered at the time.
And now, our state’s highest court has affirmed that even with federal immunity shields, you do not get to bulldoze through parental rights or a child’s right to bodily integrity. Not in this state. Not without consequences.
Why I’ll Keep Following This Case
Because I believe in children. I believe in parents. I believe in local government that works for the people—not over them. And I believe we’ve had enough of being told to stay quiet and “just comply.”
This case isn’t just about one teenager. It’s about all of us. It's about what kind of society we want to live in—one that honors families, dialogue, and sovereignty over our own bodies—or one that treats people like data points in someone else's experiment.
I know where I stand.
Do you?
