The Facts

Mother and father have equal shared parental responsibility for son

In early 2022, X was a ten-year-old child whose parents were no longer together.

Under parenting orders made in 2019, X lived with his mother and spent substantial and significant time with his father.

X's mother and father had equal shared parental responsibility for X.

Parents fail to agree on son receiving Covid vaccine

In January 2022, with the start of the school year fast approaching, X's mother wanted to vaccinate him immediately against Covid-19.

His father had concerns and wanted to wait.

When they couldn't agree, the mother applied to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for a determination on the issue.

The sole question for determination before the court was whether it was in X's best interests to be vaccinated against Covid immediately, or to wait until there was more information available about any possible long-term side effects in children of the Pfizer Covid vaccine.

CASE A

The case for the mother

CASE B

The case for the father

  • It is in our son's best interests to be vaccinated now against Covid-19.
  • X is a fit and healthy child with no underlying medical problems. There is no reason that would qualify him for medical exemption from vaccination and there is no reason to delay.
  • Although he is fit and healthy, our son does have a history of respiratory disease, and I am concerned that this will put him at increased risk of experiencing adverse health effects should he contract Covid.
  • I am also concerned about the adverse social impact on X if he is labelled at school as an "unvaccinated" child. Vaccination is a common topic of conversation among his friends, and he regularly raises this with me. He also tells me how worried he is about coronavirus. Vaccination would be a good way to alleviate this anxiety.
  • In addition to X, I have a three-year-old child and a four-month-old baby. Vaccinating X is an important way to protect my other children from potential transmission of Covid-19. It will also help protect my 89-year-old grandmother when X visits her.
  • As my expert witness Dr E has testified, while Covid illness is frequently mild in children, the risks associated with infection far outweigh the risks associated with vaccination.
  • Given all of the above, the court should order that X be vaccinated with the Pfizer Covid vaccine now.
  • It is in our son's best interests to wait until there is more information available about long-term side effects in children of the Pfizer Covid vaccine.
  • The Pfizer Covid vaccine is only approved for provisional or emergency use. Health advice continues to change rapidly surrounding both Covid-19 and Covid vaccines. Once the vaccine has been injected, there is no undoing it.
  • Covid-19 is a largely asymptomatic illness in children in our son's age range, and as his mother has said, X is a fit and healthy child with no underlying medical problems. Given the risk of exposing X to unknown long-term adverse consequences by vaccinating him now, waiting is the safer course of action.
  • Further, rushing to vaccinate our son is not an appropriate way to manage relations with his peers.
  • I empathise with my ex-wife over her concerns for her other family members. However, the question before the court is not what is in the best interests of her other children or her extended family. The question before the court is what is in the best interests of our son.
  • The court should order that we wait to vaccinate X until there is more information available about long term side-effects in children of the Pfizer Covid vaccine.

So, which case won?

Cast your judgment below to find out

David Thompson
Family law
Stacks Collins Thompson

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.