A New Zealand child, whose parents blocked lifesaving heart surgery for him because they didn't want “contaminated blood” from donors vaccinated against COVID-19, will be taken into temporary custody by court officials, according to a judge’s ruling.
The parents of the four-month-old baby, who is in an Auckland hospital awaiting urgent treatment to correct a heart disorder, had blocked the operation and sought a court ruling that he receive blood from unvaccinated donors. But the High Court ruled the operation was in the child’s “best interest”, reports the BBC.
Justice Ian Gault ordered that the boy, identified as Baby W in court documents, be placed under the guardianship of the court “from the date of the order until completion of his surgery and post-operative recovery”.
He dismissed the parents’ request for unvaccinated blood and agreed with health authorities that the child’s “survival (was) actually dependent on the application being granted”.
But he emphasised that the parents remained the boy’s primary guardians and said doctors must keep them informed at all times about his treatment and condition.
The judge also rejected a request from the parents’ lawyer, Sue Grey, that a tailored donor service with blood from exclusively unvaccinated donors be established. She had said the long-term effects of the vaccine were “untested” and accused doctors of refusing to provide an alternative donor service for ideological reasons.
But lawyers for the state blood service said the establishment of any direct donor service would have been a “slippery slope” and would “damage an excellent blood service”.
Citing evidence from New Zealand’s chief medical officer, the judge ruled that there was “no scientific evidence there is any COVID-19 vaccine-related risk from blood donated” by vaccinated donors.
The case has become a vector for anti-vaccine activists in New Zealand with demonstrators gathering outside the court before the ruling was delivered last week.
Dr Philip Joseph, a constitutional law lecturer at New Zealand’s University of Canterbury, told the BBC that the court’s ruling was “inevitable given the circumstances”.
“Even parents’ rights of freedom of belief must give way to the right to life (a right guaranteed under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990)," he said. “There are many precedents where Jehovah’s Witness parents have been compelled to allow their children to receive blood transfusions in life-threatening situations. There is no material difference between these precedents and the court’s ruling in the present case.”
BBC News article – New Zealand places child in anti-vax blood case in custody (Open access)
See more from MedicalBrief archives:
Parents sued for refusing blood from vaccinated donor for baby’s surgery
Jehovah’s Witness parents may contest interim blood transfusion order
Court approves blood transfusion over home therapy