It seems you need more evidence COVID-19 hysteria Having gone too far, a Chicago judge ruled that a mother could not spend time with her child because she was not vaccinated.
Rebecca Felt Tell WFLD, because she refused to be vaccinated against the coronavirus, she was prevented from seeing her son.
“I miss my son the most. It’s very difficult. I haven’t seen him since August 10,” Filliet said.
The mother interacted with her son via phone and video calls, but did not visit so that she could continue to obey the judge’s orders. She is appealing the court order, arguing that it is a “division of the family” and that “it is not in my son’s best interest to leave his mother.”
Firlit and her son’s father have been divorced for seven years, and they raised the children together. When she appeared in court, she said Cook County Judge James Shapiro asked if she had accepted the jab. The mother responded, explaining that she did not, because she had an adverse reaction to the vaccine in the past. The judge then ordered the deprivation of her custody rights until she was vaccinated.
Firlit’s lawyer Annette Fernholz stated that judges do not have the authority to issue such orders. she says:
“In this case, you have a judge who has no questions about the parenting time for the child to decide’oh, you are not vaccinated.’ You can’t see your child before you get vaccinated. This is beyond him. Jurisdiction.”
The lawyer representing the father, Jeffrey Leving, was surprised by the judge’s decision, but agreed. He said:
“Some children have died from the new coronavirus. I think every child should be safe, and I agree that mothers should be vaccinated.”
Fernholz reiterated that the judge has no power to make such a ruling:
“You have to understand that the father didn’t even bring this issue to court. So, this is the judge’s own decision. You can’t see your child until you get the vaccine.”
This is not the first time judges have used their positions to force citizens to receive injections.Earlier this month, a judge in Ohio made vaccination The conditions of the defendant’s parole. Essentially, the judge ruled that if he did not receive the injection within two months, he might face jail time.
These orders seem unlikely to withstand scrutiny. However, the fact that this particular judge decided to take such a step is persuasive.These officials are not content to let people make Their own decision, They also don’t care about the science surrounding the coronavirus and children. Hope these two rulings can be overturned. Otherwise, it may set a dangerous precedent.
