A New Brunswick father has lost custody of his children after refusing COVID vaccine. Despite overwhelming evidence that inoculating infants against the virus is unnecessary, the judge granted the mom authorization to have children vaccinated without paternal agreement.
Another father in Canada is being kept separate from his kids after a judge found that he presented a health risk to one of them by refusing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
The father of three was barred from visiting his children in person on January 31 by Justice Nathalie Godbout of the Court of Queen’s Bench, New Brunswick, for refusing to undergo one of the COVID-19 vaccinations.
Godbout limited the father’s visiting privileges after learning that his second kid, a 10-year-old girl, has a damaged immune system, which the court believes would be jeopardized through any physical interaction between the girl and her “unvaccinated” dad and new partner.
The parents’ names are not mentioned in the court filings.
Subscribe to GreatGameIndia
“As the parents who are caring for [the child] 50 per cent of the time, in close quarters, unmasked and unvaccinated, they are well-positioned to transmit the virus to [the child] should they contract it, this despite their best efforts,” a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) report of Godbout’s ruling reads.
The judge determined that the kids “must be given their best possible chance at evading infection from COVID-19,” judging the father’s “vaccine” status unacceptable for this condition and revoking his parenting privileges “with a heavy heart.”
As per CBC, the parents divorced in 2019 and shared custody of their three kids at one point.
Once the children grew qualified for the COVID injections, the dad allegedly declined to sign his approval to their being injected, claiming that he had researched the shots’ effects and determined that they were dangerous to his kids.
COVID-19 appears to pose an incredibly low risk to children, according to existing data. Many professionals have questioned the rush to inject youngsters with the experimental doses, citing thousands of instances of adverse reactions, including fatalities, as justification.
Last summer, researchers with Johns Hopkins School of Medicine found a “mortality rate of zero among children without a pre-existing medical condition such as leukemia” when they “analyze[d] approximately 48,000 children under 18 diagnosed with COVID in health-insurance data from April to August 2020.”
Dr. Marty Makary, the main researcher, criticised the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) of advocating for school COVID vaccination on “flimsy data” in reaction to the findings.
Moreover, during a speech at the “Defeat the Mandates” event in Washington, D.C. on January 23, mRNA technology developer Dr. Robert Malone urged guardians against permitting their kids to be administered with the experimental shots.
The distinguished scientist noted that the “genetic vaccines can damage your children. They may damage their brains, their heart, their immune system, and their ability to have children in the future. Many of these damages cannot be repaired. So I beg you, please get informed about the possible risks that your children may be damaged by these experimental medical products.”
Indeed, there has never been any proof that coronavirus vaccines prevent infection or spread. They don’t even guarantee to reduce hospitalizations; instead, they assess performance by reducing severe COVID-19 illness signs. Furthermore, there is considerable proof that the “vaccinated” are often just as susceptible as the unvaccinated to harbour and spread the virus.
Despite overwhelming evidence that inoculating infants against the virus is unnecessary, the judge granted the mom authorization to have children vaccinated without paternal agreement, stating that “[the father’s] own anecdotal research on such a highly specialized topic carries little to no weight in the overall analysis when measured against the sound medical advice of our public health officials.”
Grant Ogilvie, an attorney for the mother, said she had been “ecstatic” with the judgement and that the children had already got their first dosage of the vaccines.
“She’s acknowledged this is going to have an impact on the children, but she said, ‘I have to do what’s best for them,’” Ogilvie stated.
Godbout characterised the father’s permission to see and communicate with his kids just over the phone as well as through video calling as “generous.” She went on to say that if the father accepts the jab, his suspension could be lifted.
Godbout’s decision comes on the heels of a strikingly identical decision made sometime before Christmas in Quebec, wherein a father’s visiting rights were temporarily halted after the mother told a judge he is “anti-vaccine” and publishes “conspiracy” beliefs on social media.
Judge Jean-Sébastien Vaillancourt of the Superior Court for the District of Montreal decreed on December 23 to “temporarily” block a Quebec dad from seeing his three kids due to his “vaccine” position and social media posts criticizing the province’s stringent COVID measures.