Faulty causality is when an argument is made by connecting evidence to an incorrect assumption. This woman believed that all vaccines are bad just because the one time she got her son a vaccine it went bad. It was said that he was getting his 4th shot of that type of vaccine as well, so her assuming that the vaccine is what caused the event and not another factor is a faulty causality.

This woman uses statistics to try and scare people into supporting her statement. However, vaccines were never said to prevent such side effects if they were to even occur. She was wording and using a tone that made it seem that vaccinations aren't as efficient as so many people think and they cause more problems. This is also proven when she adds at the end of her argument, "Why are so many highly vaccinated children so sick?".

"I would love to walk into your office and feel confident that my child's going to be fine. The fact is I walked in, he got shots, and he didn't speak to me for years"

The first quote is from an opposing view (Pro-vaccine) and the second quote is someone against-vaccines.

She is twisting the doctor's argument. He is trying to explain that many people think that doctors have all the answers, however during a rising emergent situation, like the one at the time (People thought that vaccines caused autism), doctors have to move with what they know to prevent something worse. He explains how there is no concrete evidence that vaccines cause autism and that there had to be more factors in play. The woman seems to misinterpret and twist his argument and replies that it doesn't matter what the doctors have to deal with, my child got "sick" from this shot and that's it. 

As many parents can agree, their child will always come first. This sentence, if heard out of context, would be supported because it indicates that government industries don't care for children as much as their parents so it seems like a supportive statement to get behind.