A B.C. dad’s refusal to have his daughter receive the HPV vaccine has been dismissed by a B.C. Supreme Court judge.
The dad, M.S., was looking to prohibit his ex-wife, V.D., from having their two children vaccinated against human papillomavirus for a period of 24 months.
Judge Catherine Murray, in her June 24 decision, said the mother, V.D. is authorized to have the children vaccinated against human papillomavirus at a time she deems appropriate, and she can take steps she deems necessary to prepare the children physically or emotionally for the vaccine.
The father reportedly told his daughter that she would die if she got the vaccine.
V.D. and M.S. divorced in December 2022 and entered into a consent order, which means they must consult each other about any important decisions and must try to reach an agreement. If they can’t come to an agreement, V.D. can make the decision, but M.S. is allowed to apply stop that decision through the court.
V.D. wanted to get her daughter, who is turning 12 in early July, vaccinated before her birthday, as per the recommendations of health authorities in B.C. They were alerted in fall 2023 that the children in their daughter’s grade would be receiving the vaccine that year and M.S. refused to sign the consent form and told the school his daughter wouldn’t be receiving the vaccine.
He told V.D. through text that it is “unknown” whether the vaccine “protection is going to even work,” adding that it “causes more harm than good.
“Even if there was a less than 1 percent chance of my kids being harmed, that’s too much risk. We are here to protect the kids not put them in any kind of harms way,” M.S. said in subsequent text messages. “There’s a lot of pressure on parents to take these vaccines- just like Covid it’s all about money and commissions. It isn’t about health.”
To support his decision, M.S. sent V.D. TikTok videos and articles that, while were not shared with the court, were “obviously against the vaccine,” Murray said in her decision.
In his application to the court, M.S. provided a U.S. court decision that said there was evidence connecting the HPV vaccine “to the ensuing arrythmia” and an affidavit from a U.S. pathologist that says “the risks of getting the HPV vaccine for prevention of cervical cancer outweigh the potential benefits.” He also included an affidavit from a Californian woman who said her son suffered debilitating injuries as a result of the vaccine, but that court case is still ongoing.
M.S. said the best course of action would be to “review the matter” once the lawsuits are finalized.
He has also talked to his children about the vaccine, and made them watch a 20-minute video about it. He says his daughter told him she didn’t want to get the vaccine.
According to the mom, her daughter told her the videos her dad made her watch were “very scary.” She watched the videos, saying they were inappropriate for children and mentioned death and suicide. She says her daughter told her she wants the vaccine.
V.D. says her children’s family doctor says there’s no medical reason to not get the vaccine. She pointed to information from the Canadian Cancer Society, Fraser Health, the B.C. Centre for Disease Control and Immunize B.C.
Murray says she prefers the evidence from public health authorities shared by V.D. that the evidence from M.S., adding the lawsuits are not medical evidence.
“I am concerned about (M.S.) showing the children disturbing videos and telling them that the vaccine will kill them in an effort to indoctrinate them into his way of thinking.”
Murray also ordered M.S. to not discuss, or allow any third party, to discuss the vaccine with his children. That includes not showing them any information, including social media posts, about HPV or its vaccine.
