A divorced man in New Brunswick, Canada, reportedly prevented a judge from visiting his three children directly after refusing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
Parents, not identified in a court ruling, have shared custody of children, including a 10-year-old daughter with weakened immunity, since the divorce in 2019. Last year, her mother demanded a change in her custody contract because of concerns. Resistance of father and his new partner to being vaccinated with COVID-19, CBC News reported..
Judge Natalie Godbout supported the mother’s suspension of her father’s right to meet in person, and the decision was “heartfelt”, in the best interests of the children, especially the daughters receiving it. I said it was for. Professional care for non-cancerous tumors of her blood vessels.
“As a caring parent [the child] There is a 50% chance that you are in a dense area, unmasked and unvaccinated, in a suitable location to infect the next location. [the child] They should sign it, despite their best efforts, “Godbout’s ruling read.
The judge also dismissed a study that stated that his father had done his own work on the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The Government of Canada has approved seven COVID-19 vaccines, including those from Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson).
“His own case study on such a highly specialized topic is of little or no importance to the overall analysis when measured in the light of the sound medical advice of our public health authorities.” Godbout writes.
The father is denied direct contact with the child, but is allowed to video chat with the child via Zoom. The judge decided that once vaccinated, he could return to court and regain the right to direct visit.
The ruling comes weeks after a Montreal judge issued a temporary protection order to an unvaccinated father to prevent him from visiting his 12-year-old son, who had already been vaccinated with COVID-19.
“Usually, contacting the father is in the best interests of the child, but if he is not vaccinated and is opposed to health measures in the current epidemiological situation, contacting the father is his. It is not in the best interests of, “Judge Sebastian Vaillancourt wrote in a decision of 23 December 2021. The order is valid until February 8th.
The judge also described his father as a “conspiracy theorist” based on his social media posts, and strongly suspected that he respected health measures as he claimed in writing to the court. “Given. Reported CTV news..