Home » Health » Another Navarran judge supports vaccinating a minor despite parental refusal

Another Navarran judge supports vaccinating a minor despite parental refusal

The owner of Court of First Instance and Instruction number 1 of Aoiz has issued another order endorsing the vaccination against Covid-19 of a under 9 years old despite the fact that his father was opposed to his being inoculated and disagreed with the mother’s criteria. Both are divorced. The father has appealed the sentence to the High Court.

It should be remembered that already last week a resolution was knownin this case of the Court of 1st Instance 8 of Pamplona, ​​in which the judge ruled in favor of the vaccination of a minor under 8 years of age, a decision that her mother supported, also against the father’s criteria.

THE FATHER DID NOT PROVIDE ANY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

In the case resolved in Aoiz, it is recalled that the minor’s mother requested the judicial procedure and submitted a medical report for her son, who suffers from a disease that makes him a risk patient regarding a possible Covid-19 infection. The mother also presented the recommendations for vaccination against Covid in children aged 5 to 11 years from the Interterritorial Council of the National Health System.

The parent, on the other hand, opposed the vaccination of his son in his appearance, stating only that he had heard in the media that vaccination of minors was not convenient, without being able to specify in what media, or why it was not convenient, he only stated that he was not vaccinated and his concern about the vaccine was that it was not safe for him, without any objective data or scientific basis to support his decision not to vaccinate the minor, says the order. In opposition to the inoculation, he presented a document “taken from the internet of Austrian doctors, a document that is not signed or has a logo and that has nothing to do with the case at hand. In addition, in its headline “No one can press with the vaccine or ask if he is vaccinated “has nothing to do with this case in which it is about vaccinating the minor being this patient at risk”, the judge decides.

HAD ALL VACCINES UNTIL THEN

Both parents stated that the minor had fully complied with the rest of the corresponding schedule of vaccinations against other diseases and both said they knew that these vaccines can cause side effects.

For this reason, the judge concludes that “vaccination against Covid-19 is pertinent and desirable from the moment in which the risks are similar to the rest of the vaccines”, being the lowest risk patient and counting in his favor with the reports of the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Association of Pediatrics and the Navarrese Institute of Legal Medicine


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.