The mother had plenty of arguments as to why her 10-year-old daughter should not receive the measles vaccine — ranging from “most diseases today are very rare” to “unmistakable links” between vaccines and severe reactions.
Problem was, Brantford Superior Court Justice R. John Harper wasn’t buying any of it.
He recently ruled that the girl, whose identity is protected by a publication ban, be given a vaccination for measles, mumps and rubella, or whatever else her family doctor recommends, prior to her trip to Germany later this month to visit extended family.
By ruling that vaccination is in the best interests of the child, Harper was siding with the girl’s father, who is separated from the mother and shares joint custody, as well as with the overwhelming scientific evidence that has proven the effectiveness and extremely low risk of the measles vaccine.
I sure hope this isn’t the same judge who ruled a little girl could opt out of lifesaving chemo treatment…