THE ANTI-VACCERS AND THEIR CHILDREN
I have a concern that the Anti-vaccers and their naive idealism will prevent their children from getting Covid vaccine protection. The rights of the child, with their unprotected plight, because of their powerlessness, might well seem to supersede the comparative rights of the parent. The child has the otherwise unfettered potential to achieve a full, adult and happy life eventually able to make their own choices.
Since the child has no possibility of choosing, vaccine or no vaccine, who can intervene on the part of the child to protect them against the parent's dominant role?
Should the Government discuss a possible statutory right of the child for protection to make the child a temporary Ward of the Court (The Courts take over custody of the child in divesting parents of that role) in those Covid locations and situations.? Refer to the international United Nations Rights of the Child Convention: ( www.unhcr.org... › uk › 4d9474b49.pdf )
Those Ward of the Court powers already exist in New Zealand and are sometimes used for child protection. In those areas, where there is an established risk, if only to get the child vaccinated, should that protection and vaccination imperative be immediately established at law for the child's protection?
Previous uses of the Ward of the Court protection for the child have been used in NZ, Australia and elsewhere. For example, parents have refused to allow their child to receive blood transfusions and life-saving necessary medical interventions. Their medical intervention prevention was based only upon the religious convictions and faith of the parent.
An interesting discussion could ensue...
Regards,
Poll: If we want to reduce speeding, what do you think actually changes driver behaviour? 🛻🚨🚓
In the Post's article on speeding penalties, the question is asked whether speeding fines are truly about road safety, or are they just a way to boost revenue for the Crown?
What do you think? Should speeding motorists receive speeding fines or demerit points?
-
37.2% The sting of a fine (Money talks!)
-
62.8% The threat of demerit points (Nobody wants to lose their license!)
Some Choice News!
DOC is rolling out a new tool to help figure out what to tackle first when it comes to protecting our threatened species and the things putting them at risk.
Why does this matter? As Nikki Macdonald from The Post points out, we’re a country with around 4,400 threatened species. With limited time and funding, conservation has always meant making tough calls about what gets attention first.
For the first time, DOC has put real numbers around what it would take to do everything needed to properly safeguard our unique natural environment. The new BioInvest tool shows the scale of the challenge: 310,177 actions across 28,007 sites.
Now that we can see the full picture, it brings the big question into focus: how much do we, as Kiwis, truly value protecting nature — and what are we prepared to invest to make it happen?
We hope this brings a smile!
Women’s Only Tennis Day
Hi everyone, we’re hosting a women’s only tennis day at St Albans Tennis Club on Sunday the 5th of April. You don’t have to have any prior experience and all the gear is provided by the club. Bring your friends, flatmates, family and have some fun!
37 Dover Street, St Albans. 1-4pm
You can register your interest here: tr.ee...
Loading…
