Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl_G
There was not going to be a good outcome either way. If the court sides with the father then it's the mother that will claim the court took her parental rights.
There was never going to be a winner, just degrees of loss including the child who is likely playing the pawn between two bitter adults.
My only question is what information was the Dad providing? I doubt he is providing scientific papers to an 11-year-old, would have like to see a sample of the info.
|
They don't say specifically what the information was, but only that it was gleaned from the internet.
In other words, Mum is going by scientific consensus, Dad is offering " I've done my own research " kind of thing.
Glad the mother won.
"As in previous cases covered by CTV News, the anti-vaccination parent, who worries the extremely rare risks associated with the vaccine outweigh the benefits, failed to present a convincing argument in court.
According to the decision, J.W. put forward a number of "documents, links and purported expert opinions attempting to support the inefficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine," none of which was taken into serious consideration by the judge.
"
There are problems with the admissibility of information that is printed from the internet or is submitted with the intent of offering an opinion to the court, without meeting the requirements of expert evidence," Heinrichs wrote."
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
