Throughout this pandemic I have been very critical of Canadian Judiciary. Normally in Canada it is politics not facts or law that determine court outcomes. Today I am happy to say that I am not always correct. I need to give credit where credit is due. This Canadian judge waded in to a political mine field and still managed to resist COVID hysteria to uphold the law. He found no reason to overrule a custodial parent’s right to make medical decisions for their child. Hats off to THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. PAZARATZ.
This was a dispute between a divorced couples about vaccinating their children. The mother has custody and decided not to vaccinate the children. The father is a dedicated Branch COVIDian who insisted the children should be jabbed as many times as Theresa Tam wants.
The Parents both presented their cases. The judge found the mothers arguments more compelling because she presented evidence while the father just insisted that all of the mother’s arguments had been debunked. This was the judge’s impressions of the materials each side presented in support of their argument.
I find that the mother’s position is more reasonable and helpful in that she invites discussion and exploration of both sides of the story, while the father seeks to suppress it.
Pro-vaccine parents have consistently (and effectively) attempted to frame the issue as a contest between reputable government experts versus a lunatic fringe consisting of conspiracy theorists, and socially reprehensible extremists. This was absolutely the wrong case to attempt that strategy. The professional materials filed by the mother were actually more informative and more thought-provoking than the somewhat repetitive and narrow government materials filed by the father.
And this is what he had to say about the Father’s assertion that all of the mother’s arguments have already been debunked.
Quite to the contrary, I have not been able to find any indication – in the father’s evidence or in the body of COVID vaccine case law – that allegedly debunked theories have ever been properly considered or tested. In any court. Anywhere.
Not only could the judge not find that the mothers opinions had been debunked, he thought it would be a great idea if scientists were allowed to debate.
The father insists the mother’s views have been debunked, but he provides no example of any such determination actually having been made. It would be helpful if, once and for all, the competing positions and science could be properly explored and tested in a public trial.
Listed below are the materials each side presented to support their case
The Father’s Submissions
- A November 23, 2021 seven page “Position Statement” from the Canadian Paediatric Society.
- A January 2022 five page “Caring for Kids” information sheet from the Canadian Paediatric Society.
- A December 17, 2021 nine-page “Vaccines for Children: COVID 19” information sheet from the Government of Canada.
- A September 24, 2021 five-page “Post COVID-19 Condition” information sheet from the Government of Canada.
- A May 18, 2021 seven-page “Vaccines for children: Deciding to Vaccinate” information sheet from the Government of Canada.
- A May 6, 2021 three-page “The Facts About COVID-19 Vaccines” information sheet from the Government of Canada.
- A January 20, 2022 four-page article entitled “Vaccinated kids half as likely to get Omicron but protection fades fast” from The Times of Israel.
- A January 14, 2022 five page article entitled “COVID-19 Cases and Hospitalizations Surge Among Children” from the Canada Communicable Disease Report.
The Mother’s Submissions
- A June 25, 2021 eight-page “Fact Sheet” issued by Pfizer, the manufacturer of one of the vaccines being proposed by the father.
- An August 26, 2021 three-page article from the journal “Science” entitled “Having SARRS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine – but vaccination remains vital.”
- A January 31, 2012 13-page PLOS One peer-reviewed article entitled “Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Leads to Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the SARS virus.”
- A July 10, 2021 five-page article in the medical journal “Total Health” entitled “Are people getting full facts on COVID vaccine risks?”
- A September 26, 2018 15 page article in the medical journal “Contagion Live” entitled “High Rates of Adverse Events Linked with 2009 H1N1 Pandemic vaccine”.
- A May 28, 2021 two-page article from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) entitled “Clinical Considerations: Myocarditis and Pericarditis after Receipt of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Among Adolescents and Young Adults.”
- An August 1, 2020 29 page research paper published by eClinicalMedicine entitled “A country level analysis measuring the impact of government actions, country preparedness and socioeconomic factors on COVID -19 mortality and related health outcomes.”
- A June 9, 2021 10 page open letter from The Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd. research organization entitled “Urgent Preliminary report of Yellow Card data up to May 26, 2021”.
- A June 22, 2021 14 page article from the World Health Organization entitled “COVID-19 advise for the public: Get vaccinated”.
The father’s arguments relied on material from the government, government funded organizations, and the media. The mother’s arguments relied on scientific papers and Pfizer’s own vaccine adverse event warnings.
This trial perfectly illustrates the split in Canadian society. Most Canadians fervently believe in the sanctity of government and have no patience for Canadians who insist on thinking for themselves. The father present Government opinion while insisting the science was unreliable. He did not present any contrary scientific evidence. He just knew the science could not be correct because it did not support the government position.
Months ago I described this very thing in my own family. I have a family member who is also a devoted Branch COVIDian. I tried to convince him that COVID was nothing more than a bad flu and that the government’s draconian actions were not justified. To support my argument I showed him that the all-cause mortality in the spring of 2020 was identical to the mortality during the 2017/18 flu season. Nothing out of the ordinary was happening. All we had was a single bad flu season; something that in the past never caused a panic or the suspension of our rights. He got upset with me and refused to look at the data. He insisted that the only relevant data was the official government COVID death number showing COVID was deadlier than influenzas.
My argument fell on deaf ears. COVID was a great plague that somehow did not produce any more deaths than a bad flu season. Even when I pointed out that I was using government data to draw my conclusions he was unmoved. My conclusions were invalid because I was using government data to refute a government argument and that cannot be allowed. Incredibly, this is a man with a hard science degree from a major Canadian University.
Canada is doomed not because Justin Trudeau is our Prime Minister. Canada is doomed because the majority of Canadians will not question government. Not even a government run by a confessed communist sympathizer whose only accomplishment in life is impregnating an underage Student.