- Specific issue orders as to the vaccination of a child (M v H (Private Law Vaccination))
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
Family analysis: In M v H (Private Law Vaccination) the court held that, in line with the Court of Appeal in Re H (A Child: Parental Responsibility: Vaccination) and previous authorities, in the absence of a credible development in medical science or new peer-reviewed research that sets out to the required standard a significant concern for the efficacy and/or safety of vaccines on the current NHS vaccine schedule (or indeed, any vaccine that may be administered to a child), and in the absence of a well-evidenced medical contraindication specific to the child that is the subject of the application, it is in the best interests of a child to be vaccinated. In the event of a dispute regarding vaccinating children between parents, it is most likely that a specific issue order will be made for vaccination under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989). Monifa Walters-Thompson, barrister at Garden Court Chambers, examines the court’s decision and its implications.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial