One Democrat in Congress has labeled America’s parents as “stupid.”
Originally published at WND News Center. Used with permission.
And a prominent expert is warning that might come back to haunt him.
Please tell me what I’m missing here. What are we doing next? Putting patients in charge of their own surgeries? Clients in charge of their own trials? When did we stop trusting experts. This is so stupid. pic.twitter.com/VZRMZpp234
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 10, 2022
The comment came from U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., who perhaps is best known for his personal relationship with a known Chinese spy.
“Please tell me what I’m missing here. What are we doing next? Putting parents in charge of their surgeries? Clients in charge of their trials? When did we stop trusting experts? This is so stupid,” Swalwell said on social media.
His wild overreaction was in response to a comment from Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., who emphasized his goal of “putting parents back in charge of their kids’ education.”
That was a comment that addressed the leftist agenda being pursued by special interest organizations and teachers’ unions to impose their environmental, racist, transgender and abortion ideologies on children in public schools – often making such instruction mandatory.
Joe Biden also got involved in the fight, when his Department of Justice singled out parents who protest such indoctrination of their children for investigations.
One commenter explained, “What Swalwell failed to realize, is that patients may not be performing their surgeries, but they do still have a say in what doctors do to them. The same goes for kids in schools— parents may not be the ones who are teaching their kids; however, they can decide what their children learn while in the classroom.”
But it was George Washington University law professor and commentator Jonathan Turley who wrote at Fox News that when Swalwell “mocked the notion of parents making major decisions in the education of their children,” he was establishing the Democrats’ ideology over parental rights.
“Since he asked for assistance, let’s deal with each in turn,” Turley wrote. “American torts have long required consent in medical torts. Indeed, what Swalwell seemed to suggest would be battery for doctors to make the key decisions over surgical goals or purposes. Indeed, even when doctors secured consent to operate on one ear, it was still considered battery when they decided in the operation to address the other ear in the best interests of the patient. Mohr v. Williams (Minn. 1905).
“Ironically, California has one of the strongest patient-based consent rules. As the California Supreme Court stated in Cobbs v. Grant (1972): ‘Unlimited discretion in the physician is irreconcilable with the basic right of the patient to make the ultimate informed decision regarding the course of treatment to which he knowledgeably consents to be subjected.’”
He explained where Swalwell failed to grasp reality: “While obviously a patient cannot direct an operation itself, the doctor is expected to explain and secure the consent of the patient in what a surgery will attempt and how it will be accomplished. That is precisely what parents are demanding in looking at the subjects and books being taught in school. Moreover, that is precisely the role of school boards, which has historically exercised concurrent authority over the schools with the teachers hired under the school board-approved budgets.”
Turley went even further, noting that Swalwell also failed to grasp the reality of trials.