I am sure we can all remember the COVID lockdown days. The churches were shut down. Schools were closed. Small businesses were forced to close. We were told we had to wear masks and stay six feet apart.  

Post a prayer for your state!

View Comments (0)

So many people were deeply hurt by the lockdowns. Small-business owners lost businesses they had spent years, and sometimes their entire lives, building. Families lost livelihoods, financial security, and dreams they had worked tirelessly to achieve. 

Our children suffered, too. Learning loss, disrupted education, and the loss of normal social interaction affected children in profound ways. Opportunities to develop communication, social, and other essential skills were interrupted, leaving many children facing unprecedented delays and challenges. 

And these were not simply statistics—they were real people, real families, and real lives. The consequences were devastating, and we must never forget the lessons learned from that painful chapter in our history. 

During that terrible time, a hero stepped forward to mobilize the citizens of Pennsylvania to stand up for their Constitutional rights. Senator Doug Mastriano, one of IFA’s legislative champions, began a movement called ‘Walk As Free People’.  

Mastriano was also instrumental in getting an amendment on the ballot to restrict the governor’s emergency powers. Pennsylvanians made their voices heard, and the amendment was approved on May 18, 2021, which strictly limits the governor’s disaster emergency declaration duration and empowers the General Assembly to end or extend it.  

Despite this amendment being passed, Pennsylvania Governor Shapiro is currently proposing significant changes to the health code. These changes are a direct violation of parental and personal rights, and in many ways, religious rights, as well as private health information.  

Let’s take a look at some of these proposed changes under Regulation #10-242 and just what is at stake as laid out by Michelle Engarto during a podcast on Shield The Truth Network: Communicable and Noncommunicable Diseases Expands the list of reportable diseases, infections and conditions to address changing standards and recommendations from experts such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics PA Department.

Proposed change #1: 

 The PA Department of Health (DOH) wants broad authority to mandate masks and other measures. The DOH is adding the terms “prevention, containment, or mitigation” as justifications for the implementation of ALL DISEASE CONTROL MEASURES AVAILABLE.  

Under these changes, the DOH would be given the power to mandate masks in schools and elsewhere. During COVID, there was a lot of discussion surrounding whether the DOH had the power to institute mask mandates. It was found that it had limited powers to force people to wear masks.  

These changes would give them unlimited powers to force masking publicly and privately, as well as tell people where they can go anytime they deem that there is a public threat and they want to prevent an outbreak or control an outbreak. 

Notice the word prevent being used in the verbiage. The DOH would be given the authority to force masking even if there were no actual symptoms or diagnosis of a disease, just the potential for it.  

Proposed Change #2: 

The DOH and local health authorities are asking for access to your private medical records when they decide it is warranted. They would have the power to make copies of your records and take them. Reportable diseases could lead to contact tracing and further actions impacting you and your loved ones, including involuntary quarantine and isolation. Partner tracing is also a goal.  

According to Engarto, there is only a general definition of the communicable diseases to which they are referring in the proposal. The words prevention added to the language give a wide berth to the power that the DOH could enforce.  

The inclusion of contact tracing in these proposed changes raises serious concerns about the potential for Pennsylvania citizens to be placed in isolation or quarantine simply because they were in contact with someone who has one of the listed “diseases.” 

Even more concerning is the use of “prevention” as a basis for quarantine and isolation. If these provisions are interpreted broadly, individuals could potentially face restrictions not because they are sick, but because they may have been exposed to someone who is. 

We must carefully consider what this could mean for individual liberty, due process, and the rights of Pennsylvania citizens. Protecting public health is important, but so is ensuring that government authority has clear limits and that innocent people are not subjected to unnecessary restrictions simply because of who they may have encountered. 

Proposed Change #3: 

A new birth defects registry has been proposed to track and monitor certain birth defects and congenital anomalies in coordination with the CDC. Under the proposal, health care practitioners and facilities would be required to report certain cases, potentially including unborn babies who have died by natural means or been killed by abortion. 

While proponents may describe this as a tool for prevention and public health, it raises serious concerns about privacy, mandatory reporting, and the long-term surveillance of vulnerable children and families. These concerns are especially important given the enormous number of medical records compromised through data breaches and ransomware attacks in recent years. 

The CDC identifies prevention and surveillance as objectives of its birth defects activities. We must ask: Who will have access to this information? How long will it be retained? What safeguards will protect these children and their families? 

Families facing a birth defect or pregnancy loss deserve compassion, privacy, and dignity. Protecting children must also mean protecting their sensitive medical information from unnecessary collection, exposure, or misuse. 

Proposed Change #4: 

The proposed changes would give the Pennsylvania Department of Health expanded authority to involuntarily quarantine and isolate citizens. Critics argue that allowing such measures to be imposed whenever they are deemed “medically and epidemiologically necessary” to prevent or control the spread of disease could constitute a serious overreach and raise significant constitutional concerns. 

The proposal references New York’s 10 NYCRR § 2.13, which governs isolation and quarantine procedures, as a model. However, New York’s law has faced constitutional challenges and legal disputes over its enforcement. 

The proposed measures could include masking, distancing, cleaning requirements, and restricting access to certain locations. They could also involve placing a placard on a person’s door to warn others and involving law enforcement if authorities believe someone may not comply with an order. 

These provisions raise important questions about individual liberty, due process, privacy, and the limits of government authority. Protecting public health matters, but so does protecting the constitutional rights of Pennsylvania citizens. 

Proposed Change #5: 

Another proposed change to the health code would give the Pennsylvania Department of Health broad access to students for “contact tracing” and the investigation and treatment of diseases, potentially without parental notification, involvement, or consent. 

Under the proposal, DOH personnel could have access to minors while classes are in session, while they are on school premises, or while attending a school-sponsored function. This raises serious concerns about parental rights, privacy, and the appropriate boundaries of government authority when it comes to children.  

Imagine the DOH being allowed unfettered access to your children without your consent for whatever they deem epidemiologically necessary or for prevention. Included in this would be providing treatment to the child without your consent.  

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has recognized that parents generally serve as the personal representatives of their minor children under federal privacy protections. Parents deserve transparency and the leading role in decisions concerning their children’s health and well-being. 

The PA DOH proposed regulation updates are undergoing a formal regulatory review process that includes independent evaluation and legislative oversight. 

Meg Brock, from the Daily Wire, was among the first national journalists to bring widespread attention to the proposed regulations. Brock confirmed on August 24th that the proposal would expand the Department of Health’s authority, “including the ability to enter homes and schools without a warrant, access confidential medical records, and impose statewide school mask mandates for disease prevention.”  

Several questions have been raised by education advocate Beth Ann Rosica. Should consequential policy changes be made through administrative regulation or debated by elected legislators? She also highlighted the proposal’s replacement of terms including “woman” and “mother” with “individual” and “postpartum individual.” 

 There is no speculation about the language changes. Documentation has come through Live Action as well as Pennsylvania Family Council Chief Counsel Randall Wenger, who described the change as replacing biological terminology with language based on a different conception of sex and gender.  

 In a recent podcast, Independence Law Center Chief Counsel, Randall Wenger, expressed that the concerns surrounding these regulations cannot simply be dismissed as partisan “misinformation and fear.” He explained that they are being raised by public-school leaders, attorneys, journalists, Christian educators, homeschool advocates, and others examining questions involving parental rights, privacy, and the limits of government authority. 

The Pennsylvania School Boards Association (PSBA), which represents more than 5,000 school board directors and administrators, has formally objected to portions of Governor Josh Shapiro’s proposed changes to Pennsylvania’s health code, submitting its concerns to the state’s Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC). 

The PSBA has raised serious concerns that these proposed regulations could place schools in an untenable position between parents and public health authorities. 

Among the provisions drawing concern, as detailed earlier, are the possibility of public health officials entering schools and speaking privately with students during disease investigations without a warrant or parental consent. The proposal also raises questions about access to confidential medical information and the authority to impose statewide masking requirements in schools. 

Perhaps most troubling for educators and parents is the provision that could require school personnel to facilitate private meetings between health officials and students and prohibit them from obstructing or interfering with those investigations. 

The PSBA warns that these provisions could place teachers, administrators, and school nurses in direct conflict with parents, potentially undermining trust and diminishing the role parents play in sensitive decisions involving their children’s health. 

Parents should not have to wonder whether someone outside their family can privately question or make health-related decisions involving their children while they are at school. Schools should be partners with parents—not placed in a position where they are forced to choose between complying with government health authorities and honoring the concerns and rights of the families they serve. 

The Christian Homeschool Association of Pennsylvania (CHAP) has also sounded the alarm about the proposed changes to Pennsylvania’s health code, urging homeschool families, particularly those involved in cooperative and hybrid programs, to pay close attention. CHAP has raised concerns about provisions that could allow Department of Health officials to enter certain locations during disease investigations, as well as the collection of private medical information and publication of school-level vaccination data. 

At the heart of CHAP’s concerns is a fundamental question: Who has the primary responsibility for the health and well-being of our children—the government or their parents? 

For families who believe parents have the God-given responsibility to raise, protect, and guide their children, this is about far more than regulations. It is about parental authority, family privacy, and the freedom to make decisions concerning our children without unnecessary government intrusion. 

Families—not the state—bear the primary responsibility for the children entrusted to them by God. 

The unvaccinated and the Amish community in Pennsylvania could be significantly affected, many of whom have historically had lower vaccination rates than the general population. Recent measles outbreaks have brought renewed attention to vaccination and public-health policies, raising concerns about how expanded health department authority could affect communities with nontraditional medical and cultural practices. 

This is about more than statistics. It is about protecting our God-given liberty, respecting deeply held religious and personal convictions, and ensuring that public-health measures do not unnecessarily infringe upon the rights of families and communities. 

In a recent op-ed, Senator Mastriano stated:  

“I did not watch the fight over emergency powers from the sidelines. I was a leader in that fight, and I remember the Pennsylvanians who reached out to us. I remember business owners who were shut down, workers who lost their paychecks, parents whose children could not go to school, and families who could not visit their parents and grandparents. I remember their anger, frustration, fear, and heartbreak. 

For those Pennsylvanians, changing the Constitution was not an academic legal exercise or a political argument inside the State Capitol. It came directly from what they had lived through. 

This is bigger than Wolf, Shapiro, or any political party. The same constitutional limits must bind a Republican governor and a Democratic governor. We do not limit governmental power because we distrust one politician. We limit governmental power because no governor and no administration should stand above the Constitution.” 

• Pray that these proposed draconian measures are deemed unconstitutional, defeated, and can never be implemented. 

• Pray that Pennsylvanians and residents of other states, who may already have these measures or are attempting to institute them, stand up for their Constitutional rights and do not comply. 

• Pray that homeschoolers, Christian schools, Amish communities, and anyone who exercises their religious right to object to vaccinations are protected.  

• Pray for our legislators and legislative champions to be given wisdom and discernment to navigate this process and block the proposed changes from ever coming to be.  

How are you praying about this issue? Share your scriptures and prayers in the comments below.

April Walker loves God and seeks to serve Him in all she does. She is a proud mom of a 20-year old son, a PA State Co-leader for IFA, a former School Board Director, an organizer for NDOP and ASHP events, a GOP Committee member for Carbon County, an Occupational Therapist, and a vocalist. She feels that writing for and working with IFA brings all her passions together. Photo Credit: Maryland GovPics – Chesapeake Bay Executive Council Meeting, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=179355379