Home LAST NEWS Unprecedented decision in Quebec: he loses custody of his 12-year-old son because...

Unprecedented decision in Quebec: he loses custody of his 12-year-old son because he is not vaccinated

338
0
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp
Telegram

A man has had his 12-year-old child’s custody rights suspended in Quebec because he was not vaccinated against Covid-19 and deemed a “conspirator”. The court indeed considered that it was not the “best interest of the child” to have contact with his father.

On December 23, a Quebec judge made a decision that was surprising to say the least, and which testifies to the intransigence of this province with regard to non-vaccinated people. This decision, revealed on January 12 by Le Devoir, deprives a father of custody of his child on the grounds that he is not vaccinated.

The “best interests” of the child put forward

The court clarified in its judgment that “it would normally have been in the child’s best interest to have contact with his father, but not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is not not vaccinated and is opposed to health measures in the current epidemiological context.

At the origin of the dispute, the father of the family asked to extend his rights of custody during the end-of-year holidays, beyond the weekend every two weeks as initially planned. In addition to her refusal, the mother asked for the suspension of her rights, invoking for this the alleged membership of the father in antivax and conspiracy movements.

“Conspiratorial” publications on social networks

As surprising as it may seem, the judge notified excerpts from the father of the family’s publications on social networks, which according to him “reveal that he indeed seems to oppose vaccines and health measures” and “lead to believe that “He is indeed what is commonly called a “conspirator”, so the court has strong reason to doubt that he is respecting health measures as he claims to do in his written statement”.

Finally, the judge therefore suspended the rights of custody of the father until the beginning of February, unless he decides to be vaccinated. In this case, he could see his child again sooner than expected. A kind of vaccination blackmail that is difficult to pass for a part of the population.