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.
Paul Thorpe interviewed Andrew Bridgen , it’s a real eye opener !
Also was Dan Andrews regime a dry run for Starmers tyranny?
Got a link?
Sorry for delay , it was on YouTube
Israel and Ukraine are defending us too: why don’t Western moralisers recognise this?
‘I do not say the French cannot come, I only say they cannot come by sea’
Lord St Vincent 1803
England, Britain, as illustrated by the amusing graphic at the beginning of ‘Dad’s Army’ has, for centuries, since seeing off the Spanish Armada, understood the merits a forward defence strategy, even if, every so often, the gallant warriors of ‘Dad’s Army’ have still been required.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF6qElf9GJ8
What is the point of a ‘forward defence’ strategy?
‘In a modern strategy the Atlantic army must provide for the West a sense of security to a degree that will encourage it to act and react in respect to global events with confidence. That forecloses to (Russia) the options of intimidation, blackmail, and political leverage.’
Forward defence is not just about not having to fight a bloody war on your own soil but very much also about not having to fight a war at all; deterrence, particularly conventional deterrence.
Which country is one of the leading exponents of forward defence today?
That would be a country that means us no good: Iran
What do they think is really going on?
‘Iranian commentators have long fixated over the prospect of a new world order in which the hegemony of the United States is diluted through a shift to multipolarity in the three regions of the Eurasian world-island: Europe, through the efforts of Russia; Asia, through the efforts of China; and the Middle East, through the efforts of Iran. At the outset of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Iranian officials welcomed the attack as the opening of “a new front against American arrogance.’
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0030438724000322
Which is the foremost contemporary and powerful enemy of this country, having recently murdered a British citizen on British soil and, earlier this year, sponsored a terrorist attack in East London?
Russia.
The enemy of our enemy is our friend, Mr Lammy.
It doesn’t get much simpler than that.
Postscript:
‘Iran…..act(s) in concert with organised criminal entities, conduct assassinations and kidnappings abroad, and participate(s) in the international drug trade.
In the last 15 months, (the) MI5 Director and (the) Counter-terrorism Policing lead have identified 12 to 15 cases of Iranian plots within the UK against British citizens or Iranian dissidents.
These statements are in line with those of the Director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, pointing to more intense Iranian intelligence activity in the past two years.’ July 2023
https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-iran-question-and-british-strategy/#contents__accordion
Oh dear, are we now going to get daily updates on how Iran is planning to take over the world?
It may be difficult to understand that the rest of the world, outside Europe, is pretty fed up with US hegemony, meaning you either do as we (USA) tell you and take your loans from the IMF, etc., or else your country will be undermined by our NGOs, eventually leading to a voluntary or involuntary change in government.
It is interesting that the development of a multi-polar world – USA, Russia, China – is almost entirely due to Joe Biden’s terrible presidency. The very dubious 2020 election results, his completely open southern border, the politicization of the judicial system including the frenzied and continual attacks against his main political opponent, the dubious business concerns of his immediate family, his refusal to provide funds to Ukraine unless the chief prosecutor was fired (who happened to be investigating corruption in Burisma, the company employing Hunter Biden), his probable destruction of Nord Stream, as well as his sanctions against Russia resulting in a world-wide ‘dedollarization’. BRICS has pretty well exploded with applicants during his presidency.
Well done, Joe Biden!
Of course many countries are disenchanted with the U.S., particularly within the EU and, most particularly, France.
Mr Trump was no more popular than Mr Biden.
But, in a Middle Eastern popularity contest between China proxy, Iran and U.S. proxy, Israel, this country and its government should be clear that Iran, intent on the destruction of Israel, is no friend of Britain.
‘2023 – A terror suspect escaped from Wandsworth prison in London while awaiting trial for offences, including; collecting information useful to the enemy, alleged to be Iran; eliciting information about members of the armed forces likely to be useful to a person preparing an act of terrorism; and perpetrating a bomb hoax. The individual was later recaptured and is currently awaiting trial. Prosecutors have claimed that the individual passed sensitive material to Iranian intelligence
On 22 December 2023, another individual was sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison for attempting to collect information useful to a terrorist. The individual conducted hostile reconnaissance at the headquarters of Iran International, a dissident Iranian television station, in West London. Reporting suggests that the individual recorded security arrangements at the venue on his phone as part of a plot to conduct a terrorist attack.’
Unless Iran conducts further criminal activities in this country, it is unlikely that I will comment.
My comments, in any case, simply reflect, quote the views of experts in any particular arena.
With regard to Iran taking over the world, that is certainly its intention with regard to the Islamic world:
‘Iran considers itself the Islamic world’s natural leader, and seeks to export the Islamic Revolution first to areas with major Shia populations like Iraq, Lebanon, and parts of Syria, and then to the Islamic world more broadly.
By uniting the Islamic world under the Iranian banner, Tehran hopes to preserve the Islamic revolutionary regime indefinitely. Insulated by a buffer of friendly Islamic states, and directly or indirectly controlling the majority of the world’s oil reserves, Iran would be immune to long-term economic pressure.
This Iran, likely armed with nuclear weapons, could expand conventional and advanced military capabilities to expand its influence in the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean.
A united Islamic world under Iranian leadership, meanwhile, would be a bona fide great power, the first Islamic great power since the Ottoman Empire, and the first Middle Eastern actor capable of projecting power beyond the region since the early 19th century.
An emboldened, empowered Iran would be able to negotiate with Russia and China, the other Eurasian authoritarians, on reasonably equal terms.
It would also be able to extend its influence throughout Eurasia and even gain allies in the Americas, likely first turning to Venezuela and Cuba, and then to other Latin American states hostile to the Anglo-Euro-American international system.
In short, then, Iran’s long-term strategic objective is great-power status.’
Sir John Jenkins, Air Marshal Edward Stringer, Harry Halem
You seem to be looking for enemies under the bed, seeing everywhere countries we must militarily discipline and prevent from conquering the world.
Iran is no friend of Britain, you maintain. Should it be? Is Britain a friend of Iran? Hardly.
How about we just stop parading around the world, pretending we are God’s gift to mankind, and simply develop friendly relationships with all the countries we come across? That means not preaching our way of life to them, not forcing them to do this or that, but just lending a sympathetic ear and helping them develop. Because that is what China and Russia do and it is obviously very successful.
All USA does (and UK trots along like an obedient poodle) is apply military might whenever its current leader thinks anyone needs a lesson in discipline.
You will argue that China and Russia take advantage of other countries but it works both ways. And offering assistance to anyone who needs it is a good way of developing a business relationship.
Do I think Iranian religious zealots are ideal leaders? No, but the fact is they are governing the country so they are the people our diplomats should be addressing. And helping Iran means helping the Iranian people, who possibly suffer as much from their leaders as we do from ours.
You asked about Iran taking over the world.
They certainly do want to take over the Islamic world, in the view of some regional experts.
I have no need to look for enemies.
Iran has, just last year, had agents in Britain arrested for scoping out acts of terrorism.
Russia has recently conducted acts of terrorism in Britain, killing one British citizen on British soil.
Both are totalitarian fascist dictatorships intent on destroying this country and our way of life, plain for all to see.
The only way to prevent that is through the strengthening of our national defences.
That, in my view, bears endless repetition.
We know what to do. We’ve done it before. It works.
You don’t, by any chance, manage a hedge fund like Labour’s biggest donor, with investments in arms manufacturers?
Ukraine has been invaded twice in ten years. Israel has been invaded. Red sea shipping is being interdicted from Yemen. Wars smoulder on in Syria and Iraq. Iran is on the cusp of possessing nuclear weapons. China rattles spears at Taiwan and terrorises the South China Sea. Mali, Bourkina Faso, Sudan are aflame. Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia are at daggers drawn. Venezuela is on the brink of civil war…..and so on and so forth…..
No need to talk up defence stocks….
Friday morning Rackstraw Rd & Acacia Ave,
Owlsmoor Sandhurst
David Lammy has cost Britain a crucial ally against Putin
Intelligent and integrated foreign affairs and defence strategy saves lives and money. Foreign policy debacles like the Falklands and now Ukraine are extremely expensive.
‘The costs of the war in Ukraine so far could fund the equivalent of 175,000 US troops on NATO’s eastern front for 40 years which would deter Russia from threatening NATO allies and attacking its neighbors.’
‘By 2013, the last US Army tank departed Europe, something celebrated as an “historic moment” Just a year later, in another historic moment, American Army tanks returned to Europe after Russia’s first invasion of Ukraine.’
CEPA June 2022
‘Words matter as Foreign Secretary, especially when opining on conflict. Contradicting long standing UK policy in a vanity blog is totally inappropriate…’
Alicia Kearns
Investment in an active and informed (through enhanced overseas intelligence) foreign policy, allied to a sound, efficient and cost effective defence spend on deterrence, conventional and the rest, although expensive in the short term, saves money (and, more importantly, blood) over the long haul in a number of different ways.
‘Loose talk (and a tight purse) costs lives’
I doubt the US cares much what Lammy says about anything. They have their own reasons for what is happening in Ukraine – reasons you have mentioned often.
‘What is happening in Ukraine’ is that Russia has invaded, twice.
I make no apologies for labouring that point.
No idea or interest in the U.S. view of Lammy.
The taxpayer here, however, should care that they will have to pick up the tab for his incompetence in alienating allies in Europe and the Middle East.
I make no apologies for labouring that point.
Over and over and over again …
Makes you wonder it he’s being paid to do it.
There is a great deal of uninformed bigotry on here.
I provide an alternative view, as sceptics do.
If you are looking for an echo chamber, of those there is no shortage.
This site, however, is for daily sceptics.
I tend to treat what politicians say as largely theatre. My suspicion is that they also view the whole thing as theatre. They are all professionals at spin.
“Running an electric car is twice as expensive as a petrol one”
Ah well I can only guess that the forthcoming October Budget will fix that anomaly and it is unlikely to be by electricity becoming cheaper!
This is bizarre. I thought it was bad enough that Germany were bribing migrants to go home by offering them 1000 euros rather than just booting them out, but then when Sweden came out with their offer of 31,000 euros *per person* I thought this is absolutely crazy. However, when you consider what the annual wage is in somewhere like Afghanistan or Syria, wouldn’t you expect more people to jump at the chance and accept this overly generous bribe?
”Despite being offered €31,000 to remigrate by the Swedish government, polling shows that very few migrants would accept the offer.
As Remix News previously reported, the Swedish government is making a significant monetary offer of 350,000 Swedish kroner to foreigners living in Sweden to voluntarily return home. It is also important to note that this amount would be paid out per person, which means a family of four could receive €124,000.
Still, these foreigners are so desperate to live in Sweden, a majority White country, that the vast majority of them said they would reject the offer, according to a poll conducted by the website Alkompis.
The poll showed that 77 percent of those questioned in the survey said that they were not even interested in the increased amount, and only 15 percent said that they would be interested in the offer. The others are uncertain.”
https://rmx.news/article/very-few-migrants-interested-in-swedens-remigration-offer-worth-e31000/
A very good new short film ( 15mins ) by Matt Goodwin, ‘How To Stop An Invasion’. He’s absolutely right, the government could stop this if they really wanted to, after all, look at the feats the Tories were capable of during the scamdemic, and how people realised they didn’t have actual rights at all, just privileges that could be taken away on a whim. It’s the government’s responsibility, at the end of the day, they’re hardly powerless, but they don’t want to stop the mass, relentless immigration, that much is apparent to anyone who isn’t a complete muppet;
https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1837003034632540179
“Why LSE is the Sunday Times University of the Year 2025”
Ostensibly a change from the late 1960s, when students chanted:
“Free, free, LSE
Free it from the bourgeoisie.”
Can a ‘woman’ be charged with ‘indecent exposure’ if she flashes her penis in public?? I swear to God, Germany is done for. When your country embraces the woke mind virus *plus* uncontrolled immigration from countries where people hate you for many years, your country naturally goes to sh*t over time. One does not need a PhD in Sociology to have foreseen this happening. Stop the world, I want to get off;
”A trans-identified male from Troisdorf, Germany, is facing charges after attacking multiple women in two disturbing incidents involving knives and exhibitionism. But a debate is now raging in court as legal experts weigh whether the man, who identifies as a “woman,” can be charged with exposing his penis, a crime only males can be prosecuted for.
The man, 56, is scheduled to stand trial in Bonn for threats and grievous bodily harm related to two incidents, one from 2021 and one from 2022. Due to Germany’s strict privacy laws, the man’s full name has not been released, but he will be referred to as “Klaus” for the purposes of this article.
In August of 2021, Klaus followed a woman home and attacked her while she was at her front door. Klaus is alleged to have grabbed her from behind and held a knife to her throat while he wrangled her boots off. The woman fought back, suffering cuts to her neck and hands, and was able to send her attacker fleeing thanks to her loud cries for help. Klaus was wearing women’s clothes at the time of the attack, and is said to be a women’s shoe fetishist.
The next year, in December, Klaus exposed his penis to two women on a train. The regional court in Bonn must now decide whether this was a sexual offense, as Section 183 of the German Criminal Code only imposes a fine or a prison sentence to men for exhibitionistic acts. Because Klaus is legally considered “female,” he may avoid this charge entirely.
The uncertainty is the result of Germany’s recently-passed gender self-identification law, which is considered by many to be the most relaxed legislation of its kind in the world. In 2022, well-known criminal defense attorney Udo Vetter warned about the impact the law would have on criminal proceedings, writing on social media that: “Section 183 of the Criminal Code only applies to men. If a man uses self-ID to become a woman, he can no longer commit a criminal offense for exhibitionism.”
https://reduxx.info/germany-violent-transgender-shoe-fetishist-could-avoid-charges-of-exposing-his-penis-to-women-because-hes-legally-female/
“We’ll stop taking free clothes, say Starmer and Rayner”
Too late she cried! Your values are revealed
“I took cash for clothes too, admits Rachel Reeves”
What the f#@k is this? a fecking desperate charity shop or a party of leadership (he said gagging!)
Kier Starmer- Wardrobe by Waheed Alli
Victoria and kier, the poor mites can’t afford their own clothes, give the prime minister a pay rise, I cannot bare the thought of them having to live in poverty, why!…I’ll donate some of my cast offs too!
Presumably they have to put on a good show to all the other world politicians who are fitted out at other people’s expense to impress the other grifters whose clothes come from corruption. Can’t be seen to be second rate con-men.
“Britain is spending beyond its means”
Never!? Well slapper my thigh
(Not spending it on the right things of cause)
The politicians are spending beyond the people’s means. Beggaring us is the main part of The Agenda. So they can’t have us getting anything worthwhile for our money.
“The politicians are spending beyond the people’s means.”
Correct. And at some point the country will be declared bankrupt and effectively we will be sold to the IMF, BIS and the Blackrock mob.
Is Starmer’s decision to refuse cash for clothes an admission that he did wrong or simply to distract from all the other things he will still continue to accept bungs for.
“Jess Phillips: I’m ‘apoplectic’ domestic abusers were freed without tags”
Well, I’m apoplectic about this:
Teenager jailed for 18 months after McDonald’s fight still in prison 18 years later under indefinite jail term (msn.com)
“A desperate mother has spoken of her anguish after her teenage son was jailed for 18 months but is still trapped in prison 18 years later under a cruel indefinite jail term.
Luke Ings was handed a controversial imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentence for robbery and a fight in McDonalds aged just 17.
The jail terms were scrapped in 2012 amid human rights concerns, but not retrospectively – leaving almost 3,000 people languishing in prison with no release date.
His devastated mother Samantha, 57, said Luke, now 36, is trapped with “monsters” inside maximum security HMP Wakefield, which is home to some of Britain’s most serious criminals, HAVING SPENT HIS ENTIRE ADULT LIFE INSIDE.
She fears unless the government takes urgent action he will not survive amid soaring rates of suicide and self-harm among IPP prisoners.”
“Jess Phillips: I’m ‘apoplectic’ domestic abusers were freed without tags”
Well, I’m apoplectic about this:
Teenager jailed for 18 months after McDonald’s fight still in prison 18 years later under indefinite jail term (msn.com)
“The jail terms [created by Lord David Blunkett], were scrapped in 2012 amid human rights concerns, but not retrospectively – leaving almost 3,000 people languishing in prison with no release date.
His devastated mother Samantha, 57, said Luke, now 36, is trapped with “monsters” inside maximum security HMP Wakefield, which is home to some of Britain’s most serious criminals, having spent his entire adult life inside.
She fears unless the government takes urgent action he will not survive amid soaring rates of suicide and self-harm among IPP prisoners.”
“IPP sentences do not fall under the government’s SDS40 early release scheme, which is expected to see 5,500 prisoners walk free by the end of October, despite more than 700 IPP prisoners having served at least 10 years longer than their minimum sentence.”
“We’ll stop taking free clothes,” say Starmer and Rayner. “Buy us something else next time.”
“Why is he so bad at this?” He’s like the rest of the WEF/Common Purpose brigade. Promoted for their adherence to The Agenda, not for competence.
Great video on New Culture Forum today, discussing the newly released figures on the economics of mass immigration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMhLUiqrHco