- Tretheras School given ‘struggle and disengaged’ legal notice by parents of students
- Parents of 17 students threatened to be prosecuted if their child was forcibly delivered without consent
- This autumn, the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine is being given to all children aged 12-15
- Government guidance says ‘consent is sought’ for parents to jab
- If refused and the child is deemed ‘competent’ the child may ‘legally consent’
Parents have served a ‘pause and dissolve’ legal notice, threatening to sue a school and potentially pursue GBH fees – if children are given Covid jobs without parental consent.
The letter is signed by 17 parents of seven, eight and nine-year-olds at Tretheras School in Newquay, Cornwall.
The first dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is being offered to all children aged 12 to 15 this autumn, and government guidance says ‘consent is sought’ from parents.
But if it is denied and the child is deemed ‘competent’ then ‘the parent cannot annul the decision’ and the child can ‘legally consent’.
But the parents of the Cornish school have delivered a legal letter to the head, the leaders of the year, the security team and the governors.
17 parents of seven, eight and nine-year-olds at Tretheras School in Newquay, Cornwall (pictured) served a ‘clash and stop’ legal notice on the school threatening to sue and potentially pursue GBH fees is – if children are given covid jobs without parental consent
The collective believes their children should not be vaccinated because clinical trials are ongoing and there is a ‘lack of long-term data’.
The notices said they want the school to promise not to use Gillick qualifications on children under the age of 16 – where a child is deemed capable of making an informed personal decision without parental consent.
Parents want the school to confirm that it will not vaccinate children without parental consent, and the date of any proposed jobs.
In the letter dated September 26, it threatens to sue if the school “fails to address my concerns”.
The legal letter also states that they will bring ‘a case of harassment and emotional harm’ against the school, should there be ‘further harassment by school staff of our children in relation to wearing masks’.
The parents of a 13-year-old boy who signed the letter and at school said: ‘We decided as a group that our kids didn’t need the jab.
The first dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is being offered to all children aged 12 to 15 this autumn, and government guidance says parents are ‘asked for consent’ ( stock image)
‘We think there is no long-term data.
‘If an adult wants to make the decision to vaccinate themselves during a vaccine trial, it is their choice.
‘But we believe that children under 12 years of age cannot make this decision with full awareness of the dangers.
‘They’re not allowed to have sex until age 16 or smoke before age 18, but they can have a vaccination that’s still on test – schools can’t even give a child a spoonful of Calpol.
‘We’re not anti-vax – we all have our other jabs – we don’t believe in giving our kids vaccines on trial.
‘So as a group we’ve put the school on legal notice – and basically said ‘if any of these kids listed have a jab, we’ll see you in court’.
Another parent who signed the legal notice, who has a 12-year-old son at school, said: ‘An mRNA is a medical procedure and what it does, or how it works, is understandable. The information is difficult to obtain, as is freely available. and historical information about what a vaccine does.
‘There is incredibly little informed consent about mRNA for adults, yet children alone. If an adult cannot be fully informed about an invasive medical procedure, a person under the age of 15 certainly cannot.
If this is denied and the child is deemed ‘competent’ then ‘the parent cannot annul the decision’ and the child can ‘legally consent’. But Cornish school parents have hit back with a legal letter to the head, year leaders, security team and governors (stock image)
‘The suppliers of the drug do not yet have any evidence of what the medium and long-term effects of the drug will be.
‘It appears that the risk-v-benefit of children receiving the drug is highly disproportionate to the risk.
‘Whether the school or local NHS team should decide whether to force children to take medicine who have not consented to take the medicine to get it – by comparing it to a flu jab or peering to persuade children By using pressure that their decision should be changed – we are ready to instigate legal action.’
The government had last month announced the launch of an in-school vaccination program for children in the age group of 12-15 years.
School children aged 12 to 15 will be vaccinated this autumn after parents have been contacted to give consent – but in cases where the parents refuse, the child will be eligible for ‘Gillik potential’ May be able to consent for themselves after the judgment has been made.
This would allow a child under the age of 16 to consent for themselves if they are understood to have the capacity and maturity to fully understand what they are consenting to and what it includes. know.
The parents who signed the legal notice said they were concerned about the long-term health effects of the Pfizer jab.
The parents argued that their 12–15 year olds were not able to fully understand the potential dangers and so where the parents refused to consent, they should not be able to give consent for themselves. .
The parents who signed the legal notice said they were concerned about the long-term health effects of the Pfizer jab (stock image)
The legal notice was presented by the Joint Committee on Immunization and Immunization (JCVI) after the benefits of vaccination to 12-15 year olds did not outweigh the potential harm.
The legal notice, addressed to the school, read: ‘The UK Government, including Public Health England, has published guidance which makes a negligent mistake of law that there may be Gillick merit for experimental COVID-19 vaccination upon emergency approval that has not met clinical Test done.
‘Even though Gillick qualification is considered illegal in light of ongoing clinical trials (…) I still have parental responsibility and the right to be involved in the informed consent process.
‘This is because the informed consent process has the potential to create civil and criminal liability that a child under the age of 18 is not competent to sue.
‘The purpose of this letter is for you to try and prevent these tortures and potential criminal offences.
‘Medical treatment and testing without valid informed consent, in trespassing person, causes civil trespass of battery and summary criminal offence.
‘accusative offenses of actual or grievous bodily harm, wrongful civil torture’
If the vaccine causes injury, the offense of death or murder may also be prosecutable.
‘You can be held accountable by causing these atrocities and crimes to happen.
Financial damages in the form of vaccine injury may be recovered if a wrongdoing is confirmed by the courts.
‘We will sue at least on behalf of my child for a declaration of legal rights or for an injunction seeking a conditional prohibition of any vaccination and, where permitted, the recovery of my legal costs.’
A spokesman for Tretheras School said: ‘No child will be vaccinated at school without parental consent.
‘If there is any disagreement between the parent and the child, a meeting is called between the family and the school vaccination team to discuss further.’