The Death of Informed Consent

Through an open-records request, The New American has obtained documents that shed fresh light on the gravity of the decision in a landmark medical malpractice case — the only wrongful death jury trial in the country for a death officially declared to be caused by Covid. The decision in favor of the defense, handed down in June, should serve as a warning to us all.

Readers of The New American are already familiar with the story of Grace Schara, a Wisconsin teen with Down syndrome who lost her life in a Covid hospital in October, 2021. (Those new to the story can read about it here and can also access recordings of our livestream of the proceedings here.)

In short, the plaintiffs alleged that Grace died from intentional overdoses of sedative, benzodiazepine, and opioid medications, while the defense insisted that a SARS-CoV-2 infection ended her life.

Just days after the lawsuit ended, The New American interviewed Scott Schara, Grace’s dad, who said the outcome proves that informed consent, enshrined in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, is finished.

“Just by being in a hospital, you are giving implied consent,” he warned of the precedent this case sets. He said that the defense claimed, and the jury endorsed the idea, that the drugs in question were normal in an ICU, so no informed consent was necessary, nor did providers need bother to inform the family when Grace survived two drug overdoses early during her hospital stay. He also pointed out that the jury upheld defense witnesses who claimed that a “Do Not Intubate” order (DNI) is equivalent to a “Do Not Resuscitate” order (DNR), and that a doctor may unilaterally place either on a patient, also without informed consent.

Prior Complaints

However, before suing, Scott Schara filed a complaint with Wisconsin’s Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS), the state agency which oversees licensed professionals. It accused the physician who took care of Grace during the last two days of her life, Dr. Gavin Shokar, of “label[ing] the patient as DNR and overdos[ing] her on morphine.”

In order to obtain Shokar’s response to these charges, The New American requested the complete file pertaining to Grace’s DSPS case. We received some documents in late August, with only the patient’s name and certain private contact information redacted. However, the file merely included a reference to Scott’s complaint, a case which the agency closed on January 18, 2022 without investigation. We double-checked with DSPS, but the agency said it had nothing to add. (Interestingly, a second, unrelated complaint, filed in May 2023 against Shokar for “negligence/incompetence” and “unprofessional conduct” is listed among the documents received. DSPS reports the case as still open but offers no further details.)

Instead, the remainder of the 170 pages pertains to a complaint filed in July 2023, by Lorna Speid, Ph.D., a clinical pharmacist and president of the California-based drug development consultant, Speid & Associates.

In her initial letter to DSPS, she said she spent “many hours reviewing the medical notes and consulting with other experts in specialized fields” about Grace’s case.

Based on that collaborative analysis, she charged Shokar with “gross incompetence, gross negligence, medical malpractice, dishonesty and deliberate cause of death.” She called his actions deliberate “because the probability that one physician could make all these mistakes and errors, accidentally, is low. All reasonable physicians would know that the actions Dr. Shokar took would lead to the death of the patient.”

She also noted that “the degree and level of cruelty that Ms. [redacted] was subjected to was extraordinary, and repugnant.” According to Speid, part of that cruel treatment involved “recklessly falsif[ying] the medical records to insert a DO NOT RESCUSITATE [DNR] for a vulnerable patient, without the written and unequivocable consent of her parents/guardians,” and refusing to “administer NARCAN to reverse the Morphine overdose.” (Morphine is an opioid that Shokar ordered for Grace, and NARCAN is a brand name for the generic naloxone, an opioid reversal drug.)

Hollee McInnis was the registered nurse charged with Grace’s care on the last two days of the teen’s life, and about whom Speid filed a separate complaint with DSPS. Her report gives a play-by-play timeline of McInnis increasing a continuous infusion of Precedex (a sedative) throughout Grace’s last day on earth; Grace had survived two overdoses of this drug during the same hospital stay. The incidents are clearly documented in her medical record.

On top of that, McInnis piled three doses of the benzodiazepine lorazepam (two of which were given only three minutes apart), though this med is “contraindicated in patients in respiratory distress” (which McInnis recorded as Grace’s condition at the time). She then added a rapid intravenous (IV) push of morphine, which is also warned against for patients having difficulty breathing.

“There is no other explanation for a nurse with 20 years of experience, administering this cocktail of drugs.” Speid explained that it was instead McInnis’ duty to report Shokar for “inappropriate prescribing” and to “refuse to administer the drugs prescribed.”

Unfortunately, the doctor ordered, and the nurse delivered. Grace died a short time later.

Keep reading

Trump Says Youth Vaccine Mandate Rollback is a “Very Tough Position” – “They Just Pure and Simple Work… I Think Those Vaccines Should be Used”

President Trump on Friday expressed support for mandatory vaccines for school-aged children, amid Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr.’s push to end unnecessary vaccination. 

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testified Thursday before the Senate Finance Committee, where Democrats sought to grill him about his personnel and vaccine guidance shake-up at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Per the Hill, “the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stopped recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for those under 18. Kennedy, meanwhile, has fired all 17 sitting members of CDC’s vaccine advisory panel and also moved to oust the CDC head and other top HHS experts.”

During the Senate hearing, RFK revealed that in the early 2000s, a senior CDC scientist was ordered to destroy data from an internal study that showed a staggering link between the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and autism risk in young Black boys. The data showed that black boys, who got vaccinated before 24 months of age or 36 months of age, “had a 260% greater chance of getting an autism diagnosis than children who waited,” RFK said.

This also comes after Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo announced earlier this week that the Florida Department of Health is planning to remove “every last” vaccine mandate from Florida law.

“All of them. Every last one of them,” Ladapo said to loud cheers and a standing ovation.

“Who am I, as the government, or anyone else, who am I as a man standing here now to tell you what you should put in your body? Who am I to tell you what your child should put in their body? I don’t have that right.”

Keep reading

NIH Director on FL: In My Opinion, Not Having Vax Mandates Seems Best

On Thursday’s broadcast of Newsmax TV’s “Rob Schmitt Tonight,” NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya commented on Florida moving to scrap vaccine mandates by stating that he’s not speaking for the administration, but not having mandates “seems to be the better approach” and “The strategy of using mandates, it’s not obvious it’s the right one.”

Bhattacharya said, “I’m not sure exactly what — the administration yet has a take on this, but I’ll tell you, Rob, if you look in the U.K., if you look in Sweden, you look in Denmark, none of them have vaccine mandates for any of their vaccines. All of the vaccines are voluntary in those places. What they do have is public health that doesn’t lie to their people. And so, you have amazing vaccine uptake for vaccines like MMR in all of those places, without vaccine mandates, without violating bodily autonomy of people, because public health has the trust of the people because they’re trustworthy. The problem in the United States has been, public health hasn’t been trustworthy, especially during COVID, you saw a lot of, like, exaggerations about the vaccine’s — the COVID vaccine’s ability to stop you from getting and spreading COVID, for instance, and the mandates, they just deepen the distrust. The strategy of using mandates, it’s not obvious it’s the right one. And, as I said, like in Europe, you have a very, very different strategy and they have better results than we do on uptake of essential vaccines like the MMR.”

He added, “They’re not coercing people. What they’re doing, they’re reasoning with people. I find that approach quite attractive. I’m not making an announcement as far as the administration is concerned. I’m just telling you my point of view as an epidemiologist and scientist, that that seems to be the better approach to public health, talk to people, talk to them about the data, what the data actually show and don’t show, be honest about what — when there are problems, and then, treat people like adults, especially parents, to help them make good decisions for their families.”

Keep reading

DeSantis and Ladapo aim to make Florida first in US to end all vaccine mandates

Florida is set to push for an end to all state vaccine mandates, state Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo announced at a news conference Wednesday.

For decades, the state has required numerous vaccines for kids attending school, a list that today includes shots that protect against measles-mumps-rubella, polio, chickenpox and hepatitis B.

But Ladapo on Wednesday compared these mandates to “slavery,” and promised that they all will soon end.

“All of them. Every last one of them,” Ladapo said to raucous cheers from the crowd assembled at the Grace Christian School in Valrico. “Who am I as a man standing here now to tell you what you should put in your body?”

Dr. Nancy Silva, a Wesley Chapel pediatrician, said ending the vaccine mandates for schoolchildren will endanger their health and bring back diseases with life-threatening health complications that most parents of school-age children have never faced.

She questioned why the DeSantis administration would make vaccines an issue when school mandates have proven effective at eradicating and minimizing the spread of childhood diseases.

“I hope parents understand the great wonder of vaccines and how they have saved millions of lives over the decades.”

Immunizations have saved at least 154 million lives in the last 50 years, according to the World Health Organization. The vast majority of the lives saved were infants.

All 50 states and Washington, D.C., have laws requiring certain vaccines for students to attend school. Florida is the first state to publicly call for doing away with such requirements.

Keep reading

Judge rules against Seattle employees fired for religious refusal of COVID vax

King County Superior Court Judge Tanya L. Thorp has ruled in favor of the City of Seattle in a high-profile lawsuit brought by dozens of former city employees who were terminated after refusing to comply with the city’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Thorp ruled that none of them had sincerely held religious beliefs when they objected to the vaccine mandate. She said their beliefs are “secular cloaked in religious vernacular,” and that prayer is not a reasonable manner for decision making.

In her ruling, Thorp agreed with arguments presented by the city’s outside counsel, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, granting a motion for summary judgment on most of the plaintiffs’ claims. The employees from City Light (SCL), the Seattle Police Department (SPD), Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT), and the city’s Finance/Admin department (FAS) had alleged violations of Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, failure to accommodate religious beliefs and wrongful termination.

In court documents obtained by The Ari Hoffman Show on Talk Radio 570 KVI, the City argued that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate a bona fide religious belief that conflicted with the vaccine mandate. Thorp said that their objections were “secular concerns cloaked in religious vernacular.”

The city further argued that prayer alone does not convert a personal decision into a protected religious belief, citing federal case law that distinguishes personal or medical objections from religious practices.

Keep reading

The Wearables Trap: How The Government Plans To Monitor, Score, And Control You

When the states legalize the deliberate ending of certain lives… it will eventually broaden the categories of those who can be put to death with impunity.”—Nat Hentoff, The Washington Post, 1992

Bodily autonomy—the right to privacy and integrity over our own bodies—is rapidly vanishing.

The debate now extends beyond forced vaccinations or invasive searches to include biometric surveillance, wearable tracking, and predictive health profiling.

We are entering a new age of algorithmic, authoritarian control, where our thoughts, moods, and biology are monitored and judged by the state.

This is the dark promise behind the newest campaign by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, to push for a future in which all Americans wear biometric health-tracking devices.

Under the guise of public health and personal empowerment, this initiative is nothing less than the normalization of 24/7 bodily surveillance—ushering in a world where every step, heartbeat, and biological fluctuation is monitored not only by private companies but also by the government.

In this emerging surveillance-industrial complex, health data becomes currency. Tech firms profit from hardware and app subscriptions, insurers profit from risk scoring, and government agencies profit from increased compliance and behavioral insight.

This convergence of health, technology, and surveillance is not a new strategy—it’s just the next step in a long, familiar pattern of control.

Surveillance has always arrived dressed as progress.

Keep reading

Trump pardons Mark Bashaw, former Army officer who defied covid protocols

President Donald Trump on Wednesday pardoned a former Army officer who was found guilty in 2022 by a military judge of violating coronavirus prevention protocols, a White House official who was not authorized to speak publicly confirmed to The Washington Post.

Former 1st Lt. Mark Bashaw was convicted and sentenced to no punishment for his refusal to obey orders meant to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. According to the military news publication Stars and Stripes, Bashaw did not comply with orders to telework, submit a negative coronavirus test before reporting to work or wear a mask indoors.

Bashaw, who was an entomologist at the Army Public Health Center in Maryland, said he was facing discrimination because of his religious beliefs. He said he was discharged in 2023.

After receiving the pardon on Wednesday, Bashaw said on social media that he was “humbled, grateful, and ready to continue fighting for truth and justice.” The post also included an image that referenced the “plandemic,” a debunked conspiracy theory about COVID-19.

Within weeks of being sworn in for his second presidential term, Trump issued an executive action directing the defense secretary and the secretary of homeland security to reinstate members of the military who were discharged for their refusal to receive the coronavirus vaccine.

Keep reading

The Covid-19 Crisis: How Political Meddling Threatens Your Health and Medical Freedom.

Doctors who successfully used early COVID-19 treatments like ivermectin faced severe backlash and censorship from medical and government authorities

Hospitals repeatedly blocked effective interventions, putting patients at unnecessary risk by ignoring treatments that could have prevented severe illness

Over 38,000 deaths linked to COVID shots were reported in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), yet health authorities downplayed these numbers

Health care professionals experienced threats to their medical licenses simply for advocating patient-centered treatments and sharing honest clinical results

Taking control of your medical freedom means knowing your rights, documenting your decisions, and actively choosing doctors who prioritize your health over politics

Trust in hospitals and health institutions is sharply declining because of how the health care industry has handled the COVID-19 pandemic. From forced treatments to draconic lockdown mandates, people all over the world suffered greatly. Even doctors who figured out effective treatments that helped save lives were vilified for spreading “misinformation.”

One such case is Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, a Texas-based physician who has treated COVID-19 patients during the height of the pandemic. During her time working in a hospital setting, she observed firsthand how patients recovered quickly using treatments such as ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies. All of this, and more, was discussed in her interview with Tucker Carlson featured above.

Why Vaccine Safety Suddenly Became a Political Battlefield

Getting vaccinated was once viewed as a straightforward part of health care. You’d go your doctor, get your shot, and move on with life, confident you’d done the right thing for your health. While many have criticized vaccinations and their adverse effects on human health, the arrival of the SARS-CoV-2 virus put the entire field under the watchful eyes of the public.

Now, getting the shot isn’t just a health care choice — it’s deeply entwined with politics. Doctors who tried treating their patients with methods outside the official rules faced intense backlash. Bowden shares her side of the story:

• Early treatment is crucial — Using drugs like ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies, she successfully helped thousands of patients recover quickly and fully. Recounting her experience in 2021:

“[M]onoclonal antibodies came about, and those worked great. I mean, I could get as many doses I wanted. I’d get them the next day. I’d just contact the manufacturer, say, I need 200 doses to be at my doorstep. Great. They worked wonderfully. People turned around very quickly.”

• Authorities pushed back against treatments that worked — One reason is that these early treatments undermined the vaccine-focused public health strategy. Powerful organizations insisted vaccines were the only real solution, dismissing alternatives. If patients could recover fully without the vaccine, fewer people would rush to get vaccinated, and Big Pharma wouldn’t like that.

“So this is following the rollout of the COVID shots. The government is upset because people are not buying it. People are not getting them. There’s very low uptake, very low interest. There’s suspicion of these shots,” Bowden says.

“So in March, they started their PR campaign. The government, they went after ivermectin. The FDA put something on their website about, you can’t use ivermectin for COVID. Biden doled out $11.5 billion to groups around the country. Initially, it started with 275.

It went up to 17,000 influencers, church groups, sports leagues, all sorts of people just funneling out taxpayer money to go after doctors like myself that were spreading ‘misinformation’ and to push people to get these COVID shots.”

Keep reading

Actually, “personal beliefs” DO supersede “the public good”

Personal beliefs do not supersede the public good – and vaccination is a public good

The above quote – taken from a headline in the Globe and Mail – is wrong. It is wrong in general and the specific.

It doesn’t matter what “personal beliefs” are being referred to, and it doesn’t matter which particular “public good” is being protected, it is wrong.

It is wrong because “personal belief” is a placeholder phrase for “individual liberty” and “public good” for compelled action.

In this instance, it is talking about vaccination and religious freedom – these causes are often linked and used to sell decreased individual liberty as “common sense” to the “sensible” agnostic majority – but vaccination could be any behaviour, and religion any thought or opinion.

Good sense dictates and history demonstrates that anyone promoting “the public good” at the expense of individual liberty is steering society toward tyranny.

If you don’t believe me, simply observe the language used in this kind of editorial…

Respecting religious freedom is important, but it has to be balanced against other rights.

Freedom of religion was never meant to exempt people from societal obligations…

…we cannot allow those with anti-science beliefs to harm others.

The state cannot tell you what to think, but it can tell you what to do. Especially when it’s for the greater good.

Keep reading

Massachusetts Proposes Laws to Remove Religious Exemptions, Parental Consent for Vaccines

Massachusetts lawmakers are considering a bill to remove religious exemptions to school vaccine mandates and two bills that would allow minors to consent to “preventative care,” including vaccines, according to grassroots groups Health Rights MA and Health Action Massachusetts.

Versions of the bill seeking to remove religious exemptions were introduced in the Massachusetts House of Representatives and Senate.

Beth Ingham, a leader of Children’s Health Defense’s New England Chapter since 2022, called the proposed legislation “horrendous.”

If passed, children whose families object to school-mandated vaccinations based on sincerely held religious beliefs would be barred from attending public and private K-12 schools, according to Health Action Massachusetts.

Massachusetts’ lawmakers are also considering An Act Promoting Community Immunity, a bill that would undermine religious exemptions for school-based vaccine mandates and remove parental consent for vaccines in some cases.

According to Health Rights MA, the community immunity bill would:

  • Allow minors to consent to preventative care, including vaccination, without parental consent or knowledge.
  • Allow private daycares, schools and colleges to refuse religious exemptions and impose additional vaccines like the COVID-19 shots, which are not required by the Department of Public Health (DPH).
  • Subject the religious and medical exemptions to state approval.
  • Grant DPH expansive authority to change immunization and exemption requirements.
  • Require doctors to sign religious exemptions.
  • Allow DPH to publicly label programs with immunization rates below a state-defined threshold as “Elevated Risk” and exclude healthy, unvaccinated children, even in the absence of an outbreak or emergency.

Candice Edwards, executive director of Health Action Massachusetts, told The Defender that the state’s Joint Committee on Public Health will soon announce a hearing date for the two bills.

“Once the hearing is scheduled, we’re asking people to show up in person” to testify about why they oppose the bills. “Given the climate specifically for the removal of the religious exemption, we need an army inside that State House testifying.”

Additionally, Massachusetts’ lawmakers are considering a third bill that ostensibly aims at “enhancing access” to abortion but would also allow minors to consent to “preventative care,” including vaccines, without parental knowledge or consent, the groups said on their websites. Versions of the bill have been introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Keep reading