It's not semantic.
A parent should protect their child until that child is an adult, gaining their freedom and capable of making educated decisions.
To knowingly harm the child is abuse, piercing the flesh and injecting an illness or putting them in an environment to infect them with illness.
Furthermore if the parent genuinely cared about their freedom and their child's freedom,
they would protect their child until they're an adult.
But you don't understand real freedom.
Your parents hindered your freedom, you hinder your own freedom and you will very likely hinder your children's future freedom.
This is the American narrative for you right here. Freedom trumps all. Freedom trumps sanity. Freedom trumps safety. Freedom trumps pro-life advocacy. Freedom trumps health. Most importantly, freedom trumps external advice or resources of any kind.
People like you is why MD's can legally ignore parental autonomy if their choice endangers a child's wellbeing. Sadly the individual risk is not yet high enough to apply this right as a MD for vaccines, but it sure is the case for a lot of other medical decisions.
Protecting a child is not equal to saying "no" to everything offered to you by health care providers. The only difference between you and the child is that the child is unable to grasp long-term impact of decisions (i.e. developmental milestones) while the parent is saying no out of denial of vaccine benefit and overemphasis of it's supposed downside.