Vaccinating Children: The COVID-19 Family Law Jurisprudence.
J Law Med
; 29(3): 645-662, 2022 Aug.
Article
in English
| MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2011384
ABSTRACT
Australian, New Zealand, English and Canadian courts have made a number of orders, often in the context of parenting disputes, requiring children to be vaccinated. Complementary therapy options have generally not been permitted as an alternative to mainstream vaccination. Debates about parental entitlements to make decisions about such matters have taken place in the context of contested family law litigation during the COVID-19 era. However, by contrast with Ontario Superior Court of Justice decisions in 2022, a series of Australian decisions, including the judgment of Sutherland CJ in Clay & Dallas [2022] FCWA 18, have developed the law further, having regard to both the capacity of a minor to consent to vaccination and reviewing a variety of factors going to children's best interests at different junctures during the pandemic, finding it generally to be in the best interests of children to receive COVID-19 vaccinations. This is likely to flow back into curial decision-making about vaccinations more broadly, as well as cognate matters.
Keywords
Search on Google
Collection:
International databases
Database:
MEDLINE
Main subject:
COVID-19
Type of study:
Observational study
Topics:
Traditional medicine
/
Vaccines
Limits:
Child
/
Humans
Country/Region as subject:
North America
/
Oceania
Language:
English
Journal:
J Law Med
Journal subject:
Jurisprudence
Year:
2022
Document Type:
Article
Affiliation country:
United States
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS