In the time of COVID-19, there is considerable public debate about vaccinations. The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) has recommended 12- to 15-year-olds be added to Australia’s COVID-19 vaccination program, write Michelle Meares and Professor Cameron Stewart.
Family courts are frequently asked to decide whether a child should be vaccinated when parents cannot agree on the decision.
Family court judges will likely be asked to determine parent disputes over the COVID vaccinations for children and young people in the near future.
The Family Courts have jurisdiction to determine these matters. Section 67ZC of the Family Law Act 1975 is the basis of the jurisdiction. The best interest test is applied. This is the statutory parens patriae jurisdiction of the Family Court.
The primary case on the Australian law of consent to medical treatment and the Court’s jurisdiction to make these decisions is Secretary, Department of Health and Community Services v JWB and SMB (1992) 175 CLR 218 (Marion’s case).
The Family Court has regularly exercised parens patriae powers to make vaccination decisions for children when the parents cannot agree. Expert evidence is critical in those matters. Combative approaches by parents are viewed poorly.
COERSION IS A DIFFICULT WAY TO GO!
However, for the good of the populace if people will not willingly vaccinate we must go down that path. I dont recall in my 95 years such a situation EXCEPT during the AID’S epidemic? In that case it was FEAR of homosexual people and fear of transmission which made the news but at times it was ugly as human beings can be on occasion! In the case of Covid, I just do not understand the anger expressed? Now what about coercion and children? I come down on the side of regulation!