Case...father loses parenting time over vaccination status

K

Kkc

New member
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2021/2021oncj531/2021oncj531.html#document


This one seems a bit on draconian side given the low case counts in general and that his alleged first dose would give him some protection. My ex has an apparent exemption that is likely a discretionary one and she claims my kids are sick often...hmm

Regarding vaccine exemptions, this is one of those things where doctors are not entitled to discretion. For masks mandates we have discretion.
 
I dunno- it seems pretty reasonable.

How are you going to say you had a severe allergic reaction and have NO record of that reaction? Wouldn't a doctor writing the exemption at least check to see if the patient was admitted for a reaction?

The kid is susceptible to respiratory illness. And has the proper documentation proving this.

Reading the decision- I don't think it's draconian at all. It's precautionary. NCP still gets to see kid- just outside. And it's a temporary order.
 
I totally agree the father is fos. The medical note was either from a mercinary doctor or fabricated.

I just wonder if it will be a floodgate one. I am totally pro vaccine.

I just do think the odds of the father contracting covid with the case count is quite low. Well.see if others follow.

The h pylori part is honestly overkill, it is sooooo treatable and if the father was positive on the blood test it does not mean he actually has it (this blood test shows if u have ever had it) and would need a break breath test to confirm active infection. By that point child is already infected...and given antibiotics and all is better.

As an aside, h pylori was always causing perforated ulcers. The scientist who discovered this was laughed at, then he drank soup loaded with it..and then got really sick and every one praised him.
 
Im with kkc on this. It seems like the mother was grasping. H. pylori is the ulcer bacteria which is not contagious. She’s claiming her kid got infected from an outdoor visit? Bullshit.

The father should have provided as much documentation as possible and there is a way to be vaccinated while in medical care for allergic reactions. I will give them that but the rest is bullshit.

She sends her kid to school? Schools are high case counts! She claims kid has bronchospasm being in the cold, does she keep her inside during the winter? So many red flags on this that scream trying to reduce time.

There was a case in Windsor where a parent had supervised access ordered because they were taking their kids to anti vaxx rallies and exposing them to large crowds. That was legit in my opinion, this was a total waste of time.
 
The visitation time went from 2 hours to 1 hour.

I simply do not agree that vaccination status should affect parenting and do not understand why the Judge took it into consideration boggles my mind.
 
rockscan said:
Im with kkc on this. It seems like the mother was grasping. H. pylori is the ulcer bacteria which is not contagious. She�s claiming her kid got infected from an outdoor visit? Bullshit.

The father should have provided as much documentation as possible and there is a way to be vaccinated while in medical care for allergic reactions. I will give them that but the rest is bullshit.

She sends her kid to school? Schools are high case counts! She claims kid has bronchospasm being in the cold, does she keep her inside during the winter? So many red flags on this that scream trying to reduce time.

There was a case in Windsor where a parent had supervised access ordered because they were taking their kids to anti vaxx rallies and exposing them to large crowds. That was legit in my opinion, this was a total waste of time.
Click to expand...
Kkc said:
I totally agree the father is fos. The medical note was either from a mercinary doctor or fabricated.

I just wonder if it will be a floodgate one. I am totally pro vaccine.

I just do think the odds of the father contracting covid with the case count is quite low. Well.see if others follow.

The h pylori part is honestly overkill, it is sooooo treatable and if the father was positive on the blood test it does not mean he actually has it (this blood test shows if u have ever had it) and would need a break breath test to confirm active infection. By that point child is already infected...and given antibiotics and all is better.

As an aside, h pylori was always causing perforated ulcers. The scientist who discovered this was laughed at, then he drank soup loaded with it..and then got really sick and every one praised him.
Click to expand...

guys- the h pylori is a red herring. the Judge didn't even touch it in the decision.

the judge made a decision that erred on the side of caution in this case because of covid.

the mom might have been grasping and throwing up silly arguments- but I think as it relates to the covid issue- the court got it right here.

It's a reduction in parenting time...but only temporary. If this dude is only getting 2 hrs a week, supervised with his kid...there's more to it.
 
iona6656 said:
the judge made a decision that erred on the side of caution in this case because of covid.

the mom might have been grasping and throwing up silly arguments- but I think as it relates to the covid issue- the court got it right here.

It's a reduction in parenting time...but only temporary. If this dude is only getting 2 hrs a week, supervised with his kid...there's more to it.
Click to expand...

I don't know...reduction from 2 hours to 1 hour, how much does that reduce the risk. The man does not have COVID, is the child being actively sheltered from all of the world that is not vaccinated?

I don't like it when judges make decisions that don't make sense, because that often means, like you said, something else was at play; something that was not about the legality of it. Maybe the judge just needed an excuse to rule against him.

Look, I am vaccinated and I can't see myself saying the other parent can't have access because they are not; not at this stage. There are far greater risks in the general world for children.
 
Judge was nice in this one. I would have told the partially unvaccinated parent to get real medical evidence that they are exempt and removed all access and told him to go pound sand until he either had the second dose confirmation or a REAL medical exemption.
 
Tayken said:
Judge was nice in this one. I would have told the partially unvaccinated parent to get real medical evidence that they are exempt and removed all access and told him to go pound sand until he either had the second dose confirmation or a REAL medical exemption.
Click to expand...

It is absolutely silly.
More kids of that age die from drowning in backyard pools than COVID so far.
What are they going to do, take away access for having a pool?

It is all personal opinion....no numbers on this stuff just speculation and that is worrisome for this and other items that are not COVID.
 
pinkHouses said:
It is absolutely silly.
More kids of that age die from drowning in backyard pools than COVID so far.
What are they going to do, take away access for having a pool?

It is all personal opinion....no numbers on this stuff just speculation and that is worrisome for this and other items that are not COVID.
Click to expand...

What you and many anti-vax (assuming you are) fail to understand is that children carry the virus and then infect those who are vulnerable.

Vaccination is only partially about protecting the actual individual it is more about protecting the community.

And yes... Judges have taken kids away from parents who have unsafe living environments. Having a "pool" isn't the issue... Not locking the gate to the pool when the young children are outside... not watching young children in the pool... etc... its a sign of bad parenting...

Judge to Parent with Pool: Do you lock the gate and supervise the children when they are in the pool? Do you know how to swim and are there proper safety devices in place?

Reasonable parent: Yes. Yes and Yes.

Unreasonable parent: My pool my rules! My kids are smart! They won't drown in a pool. More kids are hit by cars than die in pools! Did you know that the number of people who drowned by falling into a pool correlates with Films Nicolas Cage has appeared in from 1999-2009! (https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations) So maybe I shouldn't be letting my kids watch Nicolas Cage movies!!!

Anti-vax folks survive on spurious correlations all the time... So do high-conflict parents. :(
 
Last edited:
Tayken said:
What you and many anti-vax (assuming you are) fail to understand is that children carry the virus and then infect those who are vulnerable.

Vaccination is only partially about protecting the actual individual it is more about protecting the community.

And yes... Judges have taken kids away from parents who have unsafe living environments. Having a "pool" isn't the issue... Not locking the gate to the pool when the young children are outside... not watching young children in the pool... etc... its a sign of bad parenting...

Judge to Parent with Pool: Do you lock the gate and supervise the children when they are in the pool? Do you know how to swim and are there proper safety devices in place?

Reasonable parent: Yes. Yes and Yes.

Unreasonable parent: My pool my rules! My kids are smart! They won't drown in a pool. More kids are hit by cars than die in pools! Did you know that the number of people who drowned by falling into a pool correlates with Films Nicolas Cage has appeared in from 1999-2009! (https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations) So maybe I shouldn't be letting my kids watch Nicolas Cage movies!!!

Anti-vax folks survive on spurious correlations all the time... So do high-conflict parents. :(
Click to expand...


Just because someone doesn’t want their child vaccinated against this doesn’t make them antivax… my children are fully vaccinated, my husband and I are fully vaccinated against covid but I don’t see us getting our young children vaccinated against covid. As parents we all make decisions for our children and there are many reasons parents will choose not to get their children vaccinated.

Not to mention… there are many vaccinated individuals who are still spreading the virus… I have personally had two fully vaccinated family members still catch this virus and pass it on to vulnerable people. The vaccine did not stop that from happening unfortunately.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tayken said:
What you and many anti-vax (assuming you are) fail to understand is that children carry the virus and then infect those who are vulnerable.
Click to expand...

It isn't about my vaccination status or personal views on it.
the math simply says there are other dangers with things that are not covid but here are the dangers that are COVID that were not considered:

There were no vaccination status requirements and mentions in the ruling:
-Family pets can get COVID.
-There were no restrictions to keep the child away from non-vaccinated people
-the supervised visit facility
-the others that use the facility

Vaccination status is not on any of the screening forms.
 
This case has me thinking

The ex has a bogus exemption. There were MDs that were giving those out for a fee. I would suspect that her close circle is not vaxxed.

Sept 2020 she unilaterally kept the kids out of in-person school and made up claims of their weak immune systems. Now she is okay with un-vaxxed going around the kids.

Would I attempt to use this case...no.

Do I intend on going to court to get my kids vaccinated...seems like a slam dunk to me (they are 9 and 6).

my whole point about this case, the judge doesnt understand how COVID works, that extra hour will not make a difference for the child's risk of contracting covid.

The dad sounds like a real winner and I am curious why his access is that low to begin with
 
Berner_Faith said:
Lol says the one who gives no insight into their posts.
Click to expand...

What insight are you missing? Scared to ask from your post but - You do understand how the vaccine works right, and why we still mask and follow protocols after vax?!

the math simply says there are other dangers
Click to expand...

You're misunderstanding the math, focusing on one point instead of the whole equation. Re-read Takyen's post.

Now she is okay with un-vaxxed going around the kids...

my whole point about this case, the judge doesnt understand how COVID works, that extra hour will not make a difference for the child's risk of contracting covid.
Click to expand...

The temp order was very specific. How many other un-vaxxed will be kissing, hugging, carrying, sharing, constant contact with the child indoors. The judge fully understands covid, the vax and the safety protocols in place. Judges keep kids (perhaps overly) safe when a parent is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top