A New Zealand Family Court judge has ordered three young children be vaccinated and banned their unvaccinated father from having contact with them until he submits to vaccination.
The siblings belong to separated parents who had a disagreement about Covid vaccines.
The father did not wish his children to be vaccinated while the mother, a healthcare professional, insisted that they do. Their middle child has a condition that may make him more vulnerable to Covid.
“He [the father] does not trust the science that has been accepted by governments around the world that say this vaccination [Pfizer] is not only safe but will protect against severe Covid. As a result, he does not consent to the children being vaccinated,” said Justice Anthony Greig.
The father added during the case that it was his belief the mother was using vaccination status as a way to limit his access to their children. The mother stopped the father having access to their children aged 8, 12, and 12 after separation. Despite offering to wear PPE and meet his children outside, the Justice Grieg refused and said that he was ‘not willing to risk’ the children having contact with the father until they were all vaccinated – including the father.
Given the change in Covid handling in other countries, including New Zealand’s nearest neighbour Australia, where unvaccinated and vaccinated people now mix freely, the decision to ban a parent from their child has caused considerable social backlash.
Justice Anthony Greig has now ruled that the children and the father must all be vaccinated because ‘he doesn’t want to take the risk of the children catching the virus’.
Justice Greig has spent the last three years resolving vaccine disputes between parents. His peers in New Zealand have also issued orders mandating vaccination for young children and in some cases, allowing children to get vaccinated against their parents’ wishes.
In this case, Justice Greig has determined that the youngest healthy child must get vaccinated to protect the middle child, who is at increased risk of Covid side effects, saying that their vaccination status would diminish the chances of the middle child getting sick. Rebel News does not suggest that this is actually the case.
There was no ruling made on the 12-year-old but as the ruling dictates that there is to be no contact with the father until ‘all are vaccinated to a GP’s satisfaction’, the ruling essentially mandates vaccination for all of them.
Justice Greig also said that he would consider removing the child if the parents refused to have him vaccinated.
“Indeed, if [the child] was in the care of two parents who were refusing to vaccinate him, I would consider having him removed from their care until such time as he could be properly vaccinated.”
Instead of acknowledging the father’s right to make a safety judgement for his children (and his own health), health professionals commenting on the case have written off the father’s concerns (which are backed up by an increasing body of global inquiry) as ‘misinformation’.
“I think where there are disagreements [about Covid vaccinations for children] at the root of that, misinformation which has influenced someone in the family and this is why it’s really important that as health professionals we continue to speak up about the excellent safety profile of this vaccine so that people can receive this information from health professionals that they trust,” said Auckland paediatrician Dr Jin Russell.