Vaccines Minister Nadhim Zahawi has said that if a 12-15 year-old wishes to receive the jab and is judged to be “competent” then his or her decision would overrule the parents’ refusal for their child to be vaccinated. The Telegraph has more.
In an interview with Times Radio on Sunday morning, Mr. Zahawi was asked what NHS clinicians could do if a parent says no to their child being vaccinated but the teenager says yes.
He replied: “The NHS is really well practised in this because they’ve been doing school immunisation programmes for a very long time so what you essentially do is make sure that the clinicians discuss this with the parents, with the teenager, and if they are then deemed to be able to make a decision that is competent then that decision will go in the favour of what the teenager decides to do.”
This idea that a 12 year-old can overrule his or her parents in a medical decision is based on the notion of Gillick competence, which derives from a 1985 House of Lords legal judgment (Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority) which provides that children under 16 may be able to consent to their own treatment if they are deemed to have sufficient intelligence, competence and understanding to appreciate fully what the treatment involves.
However, as the U.K. Medical Freedom Alliance (UKMFA) explains in a recent open letter, the judgment in Gillick makes it clear it is to apply only in exceptional cases.
In terms of the applicability of Gillick Competence, this cannot be assumed under current circumstances. Gillick Competence is the principle deriving from the English and Welsh case of Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1985] UKHL 7, which provides that children under the age of 16 may be able to consent to their own treatment if they are believed to have enough intelligence, competence and understanding fully to appreciate what is involved in their treatment. The judgment in Gillick makes it clear it is to apply only in exceptional cases:
“No reasonable person could read it as meaning that the doctor’s discretion could ordinarily override parental right. Illustrations are given in the text of exceptional cases in which the doctor may take the ‘most unusual’ course of not consulting the parent. Only in exceptional cases does the guidance contemplate him exercising his clinical judgment without the parent’s knowledge and consent.” (per Lord Scarman at paragraph 181)
It has been stated that:
“The right to decide on competence must not be used as a licence to disregard the wishes of parents whenever the health professional finds it convenient to do so. Health professionals who behave in this way would be failing to discharge their professional responsibilities and could expect to be disciplined by their professional body.”
Yet it is reported that guidance has been circulated to NHS trusts stating that most 12 to 15 year-olds should be deemed “Gillick competent to provide [their] own consent” over jabs.
The UKMFA sets out the general criteria for Gillick Competence:
For a child to even be considered Gillick Competent, they MUST have “a sufficient understanding and intelligence to enable them to comprehend fully what is proposed” and:
1. understand the nature and implications of the decision and the process of implementing that decision;
2. understand the implications of not pursuing the decision;
3. retain the information long enough for the decision-making process to take place;
4. be of sufficient intelligence and maturity to weigh up the information and arrive at a decision; and
5. be able to communicate that decision.
Deciding competence must be decision-specific, child-specific, made with the specific factual context in mind and based on the available evidence. It can only be determined by a medical practitioner who knows the child, not any other personnel administering the vaccines in schools.
Furthermore, following the High Court case of An NHS Trust v A, B, C and A Local Authority [2014] EWHC 1445, Mr. Justice Mosytn also stated the decision of the child must be given freely. He stated: “Dr Ganguly was also clear that the decision that was reached by A was hers alone and was not the product of influence by adults in her family. Dr Ganguly did not detect in her any sign of distress when she set out her position to her.”
The UKMFA suggests that for Covid vaccination free consent is undermined by the huge social pressure to accept vaccination: “Children are often subject to peer pressure from their fellow pupils. Children also look up to their teachers and can be influenced by the media and celebrities.”
The letter considers that no child “would be considered able to consent to the vaccine”, not least because “data regarding long-term safety and risks that would be required for fully informed consent does not yet exist”.
The JCVI appears to agree about the lack of long-term safety and risk data, declining to back jabs for healthy 12-15 year-olds precisely because it cannot be sure of the scale of the unquantified risks:
The committee is of the opinion that the benefits from vaccination are marginally greater than the potential known harms but acknowledges that there is considerable uncertainty regarding the magnitude of the potential harms. The margin of benefit, based primarily on a health perspective, is considered too small to support advice on a universal programme of vaccination of otherwise healthy 12 to 15 year-old children at this time. As longer-term data on potential adverse reactions accrue, greater certainty may allow for a reconsideration of the benefits and harms.
The JCVI also accepts that the vaccines do little to prevent transmission, stating: “The committee is of the view that any impact on transmission may be relatively small, given the lower effectiveness of the vaccine against infection with the Delta variant.”
This admission from its own vaccine advisory committee should be fatal for the Government’s plans for vaccine passports, which are entirely premised on the notion that vaccines prevent transmission (and thus that by limiting entry to the vaccinated transmission is avoided). Should be fatal, but won’t be, given that the Government has now shown it doesn’t actually care what the JCVI thinks.
If it wasn’t shocking enough that the Government is to push ahead with vaccinating children despite being told by its advisers that the benefits are too small and the risks too uncertain, it is staggering that doctors and schools are being told that children as young as 12 should be allowed to overrule their parents’ wishes on vaccination. This undermines parental authority over their children and will further erode trust between parents and both schools and doctors. It shows once again that the present Government’s convictions are anything other than conservative.
Stop Press: The UKMFA has sent an urgent email to the four U.K. Chief Medical Officers urging them to heed the advice of the JCVI and not authorise the vaccines for 12-15 year-olds on non-medical grounds.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Well we seem to have come to the end we all saw coming. Doris has gone full Saddam with his human shield of your kids, necessary so that he doesn’t have to fight the teaching unions. I guess the whole sh1tfest will be over in a couple of weeks when the under 16 corpses start to pile up. Who’d have thought it, kids have to die before adults fight back….. History will never forget this.
If child shields are used they will never get answers as to why.
Three decades on, Saddam’s ‘human shields’ want answers
If we continue hurtling down this treacherous path, “history” will not be written.
That’s the intention and that’s what’s being banked on. It is why they believe they can act with total impunity.
It’s all about selling vaccines and coercion from Big Pharma and his buddies. His shares value is going great guns.
As someone asked elsewhere, what will the decision be if the child ‘competently’ says no but the parents say yes?
That WILL happen. There was some evil trout on Mumsnet complaining her teens didn’t want the vaccine despite her attempts to brainwash them.
Oh goody.
The “evil trout” must be proper pissed off with the teachers of her children; thinking for themselves. What on earth is going on?
Thank God some children can think independently.
We all know. Whatever decision the governing activists want takes precedence.
Happens in “Climate Change” (where activists get to ride on private jets while the rest of us have our cars and gas boilers taken away), or in “Institutional Racism” ™ where some pointless unevidenced complaint that a black person is disadvantaged is treated as gospel, while whites are sacked or beaten up for not being black and teh world turns a blind eye. And in any other activist-driven part of modern politics…
A Gillick competent child refuses but the parent consents then the procedure goes ahead.
The definition of “competence” will be “accepts the prick”.
The prick being Boris.
It’s a simple process:
The Issue is never the issue. The issue is always The Revolution.
What a great point.
I don’t think the corpses will pile up and change opinion. Well they will, but not to the extent that they won’t ignore it. Just like they are ignoring all the young athletes suddenly getting heart attacks and so on.
there will be maybe 80 deaths I worked out if all children in this age group take it. So probably half that, based on what I’ve gleaned from Mumsnet, and the vaccine loving nutters there.
I agree. I think the initial body count – God help me – will be low but the real damage will be seen when the infertility issues appear. The real purpose behind injecting young children is to ensure they cannot procreate.
Nothing so straightforward. As far as I can see,
The purpose behind the vaccine was to make money for the Pharma companies
The reason the politicians went for it was that they could look goo by saving us all from death
Once the vaccines didn’t work quite as well as expected, their supporters in Government fiddled the figures to avoid being charged with supporting a wasteful and dangerous policy, and doubled down on getting everyone vaccinated continually.
Government staff will now lose their jobs if they don’t support vaccination of everyone, so some more figures will have to be fiddled….
We should start seeing the effects pretty soon. By the start of next year it should be obvious.
it’s obvious in is real.
More importantly than the obscure legal arguments, the government is morally wrong.
And the sight of a supposedly conservative government steppng so heavily and so deeply into a private family medical matter is grotesque in the extreme.
Why is the government so desperate for children to be vaccinated, for no benefit to them and at significant risk?
Time for some investigative journalism. Does anyone still do that?
Very, very few.
Looking at that list, I’m not sure the majority of our population are Gillick competent, let alone 12 year olds.
In my opinion this country has got to a point where Parliament needs to be dissolved, for at least two years, and a truly independent ‘Truth Commission’ needs to be set up and tasked to find out how this country got in this parlous state, who and what is behind all the events of the past 18 months, and in particular investigate the roles and actions of the:
Politicians
Police
Scientists
Academics
Mainstream Media
Pharmaceutical / Vaccine Industry
Gates Funded Organisations
World Health Organisation (WHO)
World Economic Forum (WEF)
Whilst the above is being investigated a new social and lawful framework should be formulated and put in place, and whereby nothing like the past 18 months can ever be allowed to happen ever again.
Well, that’s the gist of my thoughts. Obviously it would need a lot more fleshing-out, but I honestly can’t see any other humane way out of this. One thing is for certain; in no way am I accepting a WEF inspired technocratic tyranny now or in future.
Who would appoint such a commission?
None of the usual suspects, that’s for certain.
… which simply brings you back to the question in circular fashion.
No brain behind that down-vote, then
Net down vote. I did an up vote before and it went down to minus three from minus one.
This is no different to the argument that paedophiles make.
In both cases it’s about tricking children into accepting a harmful prick inside them.
What I find interesting is that when Labour pushed to have voting she pushed to 15 or even 12, the Tories had a fit (rightly so). Well, if they can choose a vaccine less than a year in existence, they should be able to choose the PM. Competency to make decisions means we are pretending their adults. Well…then let these “adults” vote and drink too.
.. then let these “adults” vote and drink too ..
also let them consent to marry, have sexual relationships, remove censorship of films, internet, leave school and get full time employment.
I left school (where sexual relationships were available behind the bike shed) at 15, and entered full time employment.
I was employed by Heppell’s and trained as a dispensing assistant. After 6 months, I was deemed responsible enough to dispense medicines without someone looking over my shoulder.
(Especially as a Min. of Health analysis of a test prescription passed my effort 100% OK!)
And I could always ‘con’ my way into X rated films.
But that was 1958.
…and have sex…and gamble…and drive…and join the armed forces…and leave school…
This is truly becoming weird. There is probably near 0 risk to children from Covid. We have legions of data that schools and students are not major drivers of outbreaks. We know that there is a global shortage of vaccines. And yet, not only is the government to overrule the expert opinion, they intend to empower pre-teens to make a vaccine decision without patent consent. They are really driven to do this.
Why? It isn’t about outbreaks and it ain’t about school interruption because unless you get 100% vaccination, the freak out at every single positive test will continue because vaccines don’t stop transmission. So why? What is the real motivation? That is what, and I’m not conspiracy theorist, is truly driving this?
I think Parliament should approve this, but with one caveat. Javid, Whitty and Boris must be charged with murder for every death among this age cohort that has any connection to the vaccine. Seems fair, given we know Covid is near 0 risk that if the vaccine is actually less risk, they shooed be happy to face charges if this proves to be untrue. That would be a trial I’d follow very closely.
Apologies, my autocorrect changed isn’t to
ain’t. So embarrassed.
Ain’t it annoying when that happens?
And Zahawi. And Hancock. And everyone linked with the development/sale of the jabs, especially the heads of Pfizer, Oxford/Astra Zeneca, and Moderna.
… and behind it all is a very simple question : Who would trust the judgment of a government that has been so observably incompetent and plain wrong on just about every judgment it has made?
Hang on, that’s a bit unfair. All of the ruling junta are corrupt despots, starting with de Pfeffel himself. Zahawi, if anything, is just a bit smarter and was playing the long game by founding YouGuv to tell us that we agree with him.
Just part of the push for the state to control every aspect of our lives – otherwise known as totalitarianism.
The system is irredeemably broken. Time to join the millions waking up, ignoring the state and living their lives as they consider right.
We are not children. We can run our own lives.
They’re coming for the kids in Australia, too. For all those planning to resist in the UK, the following Australian website has some useful material for emails, for flyers and for letters to schools withdrawing consent which you may care to adapt for the UK context.
https://www.reignitedemocracyaustralia.com.au/save-our-kids/
Phil, South Australia
PS the website (Reigniting Democracy Australia) is the one whose founder (Monica Smit) languishes in prison on a charge of ‘incitement'(!) and is now in solitary confinement because she has refused the useless PCR test. Conditions for her bail include dismantling the website. Seems like if the authorities can’t win an argument on facts and logic, they resort to jail and censorship. Can’t have much faith in the integrity of their own Covid/’vaccine’ worldview.
Good grief. The poor woman.
How many kids died or were injured in the recent Australian jabathon? Will we ever know?
Vaccination of children is just plain evil.
And of those 0.2, no doubt most had other serious medical condition(s)
coerced swimming lessons soon?
And woodwork!
My earliest recollection of a British government was Thatchers win in 1979 – I had just turned 12 years old but I recall seeing her victory on the TV and everyone being excited about Britains first woman PM – all my early youth was lived under a Thatcher government but before her I really had no interest in politics – Thatcher had her faults and so did every other single government since her departure in 1990 – Major, Blair, Cameron, May – none were perfect and to be honest I could give a tuppence for any of them and there were times I was glad to see the back of them all – but this current government has to be the most evil government ever to take the levers of power and use them to such a deliberately manipulative extent as to become possibly the most sadistic authoritarian regime ever in the history of British politics – not only do I want to see the back of these monstrous bunch of pathological liars but I want see them all on trial for crimes against humanity and with the severest punishments handed down as they were handed down to those Nazi criminals during the Nuremburg Trials of 1945-46 of which you can barely get a fag paper between those war criminals and this current Tory government today – the only difference is that they wore military uniforms so you knew who the enemy was – this lot wear business suits and pretend to be one of us..
Easily forgotten but the one-eyed scottish idiots time as PM was pretty awful as well.
I go back a lot longer than you but I absolutely concur. I even changed my mind about some of them (Wilson, Heath) but I will never change my mind about this shower.
Up until February this year when I retired I was a registered nurse who worked with children although adult trained. I certainly would not just plough ahead and treat anyone under 16 without determining whether they were able to consent. In my mind a 3 year old can “consent” to a small graze being cleaned and dressed but not for anything more. Likewise an eight year old can consent to a small head wound being cleaned and glued, but if it required stitches then I’d be less confident. Bear in mind that Gillick competency is regarding giving consent not withholding consent. The part about the NHS having a history of giving vaccines in schools is correct in as far as those vaccinations form part of the childhood vaccine programme and I think they required parental consent (certainly pre Gillick).
Therefore, anyone of this age group, having duly considered things for themselves, is able to buy tobacco or alchohol (and other prohibited items) for themsmselves? Marriage, voting etc, etc?
Basically, that’s what is being said at the same time. You can’t have it both ways. Oh, but they can. They always do.
Utter nonsense! Thing is, they know they are talking blatant shite, and are hoodwinking us, but they just don’t care.
This is something I see incredibly often these days. People willing to make huge illogical exceptions because they’re dealing with something they personally think is right. Censorship is wrong… except when censoring people I don’t like. Democracy must be upheld… except when it benefits people I don’t like. Fascism is bad… except when I get to stomp on people I don’t like. Forcing children to do things without their parent’s consent is bad… except when I force them to do things I think they should be doing.
The world would be a much better place if we got rid of this type of idiotic, selfish hypocrisy.
Absolutely!
The drive for child injections is the same as ‘incentivising’ non-vaxed, they want to remove any control group. Then whatever happens they are in control of the dialogue, there is no data in order to argue. This is exactly how totalitarians work.
Whether the original motive was money, morphed into covering tracks, or something more evil from the beginning; its now irrelevant. They are in full fascist mode. ‘Public Health’ is being used as the banner for Corporate Statism. And as nearly all western ‘states’ are in lockstep, its international corporatism. We no longer ‘own’ our bodies , they are assets of the international globcap structure.
Just listen to the screaming if you suggest that a corollary is that 12 year olds are therefore competent to vote (the judgments are no more complex or less subject to propaganda).
… or even louder screaming if you suggest that they are competent to consent to sex.
Is the government competent to make decisions on vaccine treatment?
Given that it is now ignoring its own appointed specialist advisers, I think that would be a difficult case to make.
Haha, good point!
It has been pointed out elsewhere that this assumption that underage children are capable of making decisions about their health and getting vaccinated, against their parents’ wishes could equally be argued for those same children consenting to s e x with adults.
The responsibility of parents for their children being undermined and removed by the state could equally be done for other things. It’s immoral and dangerous.
Bears, woods, trees, Popes, Catholics, etc etc.. Not a single person on the planet has had a ‘Covid Vaccine‘ – Lots of people have been subjected to experimental mRNA injections. Loving the Radio 4 Nuremberg Series. Interesting how the Beeb are trying to warn us in other ways: Updated information, resources and useful links: https://www.LCAHub.org/
There is a huge difference between a 15 year old deciding to go on the pill and a 12 year old just for starters.
I had a girlfriend long ago who was put on the pill at 14 or 15 for her appalling periods. Her parents told the doctor NOT to tell her it was the contraceptive pill because they didn’t want her having sex before marriage. Evidently the parents were not Gillick competent.
it is not the competence of children i would be worried about, rather that of the government. If the Gillick test is applied to their handling of the pandemic, they fail on all five counts. This government must be the most incompetent in history.
Let me get this straight. Schools can’t slap sunscreen on kinds without parental consent, but can inject some experimental substance into kids without that consent? An experimental substance which, in comparison to all other vaccines in use, has an alarmingly higher frequency of serious adverse effects, including death?
And we’re going to allow kids to make the decision for themselves?
Damn.
KIDS not “kinds” in that 2nd sentence. Doh!
Man, if my 14 year old Regan (the exorcist) kid had her way – I’d be in literal chains serving her junk food in bed while she smokes pot and writes (not half bad) rap songs – oh and she’d take hormones to become a ‘he’ then get bored with that and take some other shit to go back to ‘she’ – ok I am making the point that most kids are brought up (groomed?) by the internet whether us well meaning parents like it or it. Luckily, the kid is on board re not taking the jab as she hates any pain at all – but morally – each month for about a week – she’s a hormone driven devil possessed hysterical maniac and so, no, she has no interest or brain capacity to make a decision that goes against the tik tok WhatsApp chat blah blah crowd. And so the fact remains she will not be jabbed because I will not allow it and given she is a chip off my block, I can be Satan on steroids and pity anyone who tries to harm my kid.
So the kid is competent to defy parents and get a jab but not competent to buy a tube of glue for an Airfix kit?
If a school has coerced a child into taking a vaccine against the wishes of the parent(s) then it has obviously taken over the medical supervision of that child. So, when they ring a parent to say little Jimmy is ill and can you come and collect him the parent should say it’s obviously up to the school to look after the child as they have assumed medical competency for the child.
The Cabinet, the opposition, the MSM have all aided & abetted to this catastrophe. I really hope that they Do NOT cross this final RED LINE & #LeaveOurKidsAlone it’s already a present day Holocaust. only 9 0-19 year olds have passed away with our any existing co-morbidity out of a total of 48, according to Gov figures.
#AnotherHolocaust