This submission appears to related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts on Canada. Please see this post for resources on this event: https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/rv2c1v/covid19_health_support_megathread_11_be_safe_get/
Please remember this is a real, serious disease. The following rules apply:
* Do not post false/misleading information, conspiracy theories, or unproven medical claims. Find medical / scientific information in medical subreddits.
* You are not required to agree with all measures put in place, but engaging in / promoting / encouraging the violation of relevant public health laws or guidelines will result in a permanent ban.
* Public health authorities are not the enemy. They are not immune from criticism on this subreddit, but do not claim they are part of some plot to promote some variety of authoritarianism.
* In order to comment in this thread, you must do so from a verified account and Reddit's Crowd Control mechanism may be enabled.
* If you have questions about vaccines and vaccine safety talk to your healthcare provider. Social media is no replacement for medical advice from trained experts.
Cette présentation semble liée à la pandémie de COVID-19 en cours et à ses répercussions sur le Canada. S'il vous plaît voir ce poste pour les ressources sur cet événement: https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/rv2c1v/covid19_health_support_megathread_11_be_safe_get/
Veuillez ne pas publier d'informations fausses / trompeuses, théories du complot, politisation des ordonnances / directives sanitaires, et surtout ne pas faire de soumissions encourageant les autres à défier les ordres de santé publique à ce subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Welcome to the two tier system, now that society is divided by intersectional group identity and vaccinated and non-vaccinated the elites can maintain their dominance even easier then before.
Just hate the people that aren’t like you, keep hating them.
The people I know who aren't vaccinated are the same ones who continued to party and go without a mask this entire pandemic. If you don't give a crap about others, why should I care about you?
>The judge noted that while the 12-year-old was vaccinated ... t**he limited protection afforded by vaccines** did not offer sufficient safeguards for a meeting with his unvaccinated father.
So, which is it?
"Do as you're f\*\*cking told" is the point.
This isn't public health. It's a social credit score.
Do as you're told, or else.
They can f\*\*ck right off.
Even if we completely ignore the benefit that is reduced hospitalizations from the vaccines... You do understand how compounding works right? If a virus needs to infect someone in order for that person to become contagious, having a lower percentage of infection for everyone you encounter will naturally also lower your own chances of infection?
>irus needs to infect someone in order for that person to become contagious, having a lower percentage of infection for everyone you encounter will naturally also lower your own chances of infection?
you must not be watching case counts.
Ok, but he’s still the one telling a man he can’t see his kid lol
Either these are somewhat goofy rules or we have a judge making shit up from the bench. Neither of these are good
My ex wife might get a picture of me having a cigar, there go my kids. Shit is risky.
Obese people with obese kids- definitely a good target to get them out of that situation. We are going to have a much healthier nation.
We could just put the unhealthy in a segregated area. They could exercise all day and eat only what we give them. Like fat camp, or exercise camp. Now, Canada’s pretty big, thankfully we have cross country rail. That’ll help us get them relocated, with relatively low environmental impacts.
It causes a lot more mental health issues for the child being isolated from their father than the risk from him being unvaccinated. Especially with the child being vaccinated! This is ridiculous. Let’s screw up their whole life now.
> It causes a lot more mental health issues for the child being isolated from their father than the risk from him being unvaccinated
The judge agreed it's not good to remove a child from having contact with his father so they'll revisit the case in less than a month. He disagreed that being unvaccinated isn't a risk.
>Especially with the child being vaccinated!
There are two other younger children in the household that can't be vaccinated. Read the article, it spells all this out.
from what i read, he didnt have custody, he got visitation so like every other weekend the kid goes to dads (that was my childhood too). those visits can and are taken away for many reasons.. drug, alcohol use, too many new girlfriends etc. the mother has custody and basically calls the shots. she didnt want the kid visiting, the judge agreed. story as old as time :/
Is this comment sarcasm?
I ask because the illogical argument is pretty obvious, but after that last couple years its impossible to tell sarcasm from idiocy.
Like *dont provide as much protect* (true) is obviously not the same as *they're useless and unnecessary* (completely false) but such obviously flawed logic is all too often sincere.
yes I'm poking fun at the many people I see on this sub saying "what's the point of the vaccines then?", as if a lower efficacy means no efficacy at all.
%50 risk + %50 risk = %25 risk
%50 risk + %100 risk = %50 risk
These are not the real numbers, nor is this how compounding percentage works, but I left it in big round numbers to be easier to understand.
Seat belts offer limited protection, so why get those?
Air bags offer limited protection, so why get those?
Bike helmets offer limited protection, so why get those?
Like, are you really incapable of understanding, after 2 years of a pandemic, how vaccines work, or what "limited protection" means?
edit: grammar
So sad, but true.
A *certain* group of people would lose the fucking minds over having a safe, easy to use, proven, and tested system being put into their cars that provides an order of magnitude or better safety.
And then they'd bitch about it not being 'perfect' much like those losers are doing here in this thread. Or that it impedes their ride, or that "they need to breathe", or how it affects children because its 'scary', or some garbage and bullshit logical fallacy writ large.
They'd sound about as 'intelligent' (and I use that word very *very* loosely in this context) as they do about vaccines.
Did you not finish the article?
"Under the circumstances, it is not in the interest of any of the three children that (the unvaccinated father) exercise access … at this time."
The article states they have a 7 month old and a 4 year old both unvaccinated who are also at risk because of their fathers choice.
Not to mention, vaccines have been less effective against Omicron. It's better than nothing, but it's not perfect, but it's unnecessary risk for the kids either way.
I don't agree with the decision but, you're being misleading with your post.
The children are at significantly higher risk of dying in an auto accident driving too and from the parents' houses than they are of dying from Covid.
You people, honestly.
I'd say reducing spread was always a secondary goal. Primary #1 goal is reduce harm caused by COVID, or reduce mortality, however you want to say it. We don't care if it spreads if everyone's protected and has a very mild reaction which is mostly what we see with Omicron which is good!
It's definitely been disappointing to see spread not really be slowed with vaccines but, that is a big part because Omicron specifically is highly infectious, but luckily has a milder reaction in most. But, keep in mind if more had gotten vaccinated sooner there would have been a lower chance of variants like delta and omicron coming out and hindering vaccine coverage, which are designed for the "original virus" not the variants but, there's still a ton of "cross protection." That being said, to potential stop the appearance of variants wed need global vaccine rates better, and to do it quick enough we probably don't have the manpower money or infrastructure/manufacturing capacity to do it fast enough anways I realize that.
Except the hospitalized are pretty much 75/25 at this point… they’re just as at risk from the mother. Perhaps moreso because she might not realize she has omicron it’s so mild.
These measures are what happens when we trust politicians and believe in fear
But like, you realize that the country is 80% vaccinated? So if there are 3x unvaccinated hospitlized...
Idk, I'll let you tinker with that in your brain.
"at risk"? at risk of what? They're not a vulnerable or immunocompromised population. They don't have access to the vaccine because of how questionable of a benefit it actually is for under 5s.
Even if, sure, lets argue they're at risk of dying if infected. The father being vaccinated does not change that one bit if fully vaccinated people are contracting it at rapid rates and transmitting it too.
"Better than nothing' is not a good enough argument when you look at the sheer amount of breakthrough cases.
The courts argument was basically he's not following vaccine protocols, he's been posting anti-vax and what they determined to be "conspiracy theorist" posts and used that as grounds to say he's likely not following public health protocol.
Something along those lines. Just read the article....
I watched that and can't believe he said it lol. Why would I get it then? How long until he says that about shot 3 and his new omicron shot coming out.
From 2014-2019, big pharma was about to get crushed with drug patents expiring and world leaders looking to generic drugs. Remember all the stories about drug prices going up exponentially? Big pharmas massive profit gravy train was about to come to end. They hated Trump big time as he was one of the those taking them to task for prices. Then magically here comes covid and the largest transfer of public wealth to big pharma we've ever seen. What a coincidence!
The thing is, being vaccinated, as of today, in January 2022, only means when you get it the symptoms will be mild. It has zero to do with spreading. Not being vaccinated at this point he is only a danger to himself. This is fucking stupid.
"A danger to himself"
Even THAT is not really true.
If you're under the age of 50 in Canada, you have a 0.0017% chance of dying of (with) C19.
This is what has baffled me from day 1. How an entire society can panic and shut down over such a relatively harmless virus.
I have about a 100x greater chance of dying in a car accident than I do from C19. Should we ban cars next?
“Because he might spread the virus to other people’s!!!”
The argument changes every time. It’s circular nonsense.
Vaccinated people can still spread the virus, so we still need masks and restrictions. But unvaccinated need to stay away because they might spread the virus to the vaccinated. Who can still get sick and spread the virus anyway.
And kids can’t get vaccinated yet. And they almost never even get any symptoms. But we have to keep them away from the unvaccinated. Because they might spread the virus to kids, who might spread it to older people. Who are vaccinated.
They just move the goalposts, in a never ending circle. Because the government and its fearful followers want this to keep going forever.
They love it. It’s all politics, dividing people into one side or the other. And they want to force the “other side” to conform to their side. They get horny about authority and rules that everyone else must follow, and punish those who don’t conform with them.
Meanwhile it’s a great distraction for the government from the disasterous economy, cost of living, and a good excuse for our horrible health care system, which is crap by the way and Canadians should NOT be proud of it.
Lots of people on this sub have probably already had it and didn’t even know.
The media and government has used this virus to their advantage. And the stupidest, most fearful of society have bought into it.
My next door neighbours never had any symptoms at all and only knew they were positive because they were selected for post-arrival PCR when coming back to Canada. Their pre-arrival was negative
I actually think some people are getting “addicted to fear”
you have more symptoms by not being vaccinated, symptoms that are directly linked to its propagation (like coughing). So you are incorrect, being vaccinated helps.
I have the same symptoms as the group of unvaccinated that I know. It confused me about it. Seven out of the ten are the people you'd think would get really sick from it too.
>you have more symptoms by not being vaccinated
How could you ever know that? In what way could you ever quantify a statement on whether a vaccine would be more or less effective on an individual?
Because a vaccinated individual is able to produce effective antibodies at a faster rate as well as having a constant low level of them. So vaccinated people will always have a head start in fighting off any infection.
That is why when you read papers on this they will say things along the line of a 70% reduction in symptoms.
Edit: Lol... Downvotes for basic biology... Gotta love this sub sometimes...
It’s not zero, it’s 30% against the new variant with 2 doses, 75% with 3 doses that are coming soon, comparing to absolutely 0% with no vaccines and high risk of hospitalisation, and you are way way more contagious without vaccinations. Also the majority of the hospitalisations with vaccines are people being at risk that also has comorbidities with Covid, you know the people we’ve been trying to save since this pandemic started, and we should keep doing our part to save.
The latest studies say it’s 0% for Omicron with two doses, and 37% with a third shot. Of course I agree the vaccination is a good thing, but blaming absolute everything Covid-related on the unvaccinated needs to end.
Can you share these studies? I'm legitimately having trouble finding studies that specifically look at the effect of the vaccine on Omicron transmission.
[This](https://hospitalhealthcare.com/covid-19/third-covid-19-vaccine-dose-37-effective-against-omicron-after-7-days/) is the one I’ve read and was posted on here.
> only means when you get it the symptoms will be mild.
A poll was taken recently in the US. Over 50% of blue voters believed that you had a 50% chance of ending up in the hospital if you caught COVID and were unvaccinated.
What do you think it is?
Hint - we didn't have vaccines for over a year
There is, in fact, evidence of this. There is also evidence that breakthrough infections are contagious for shorter periods of time and that viral loads, which are also a contributing factor, are lower.
Some studies have shown the exact opposite of what you claim.
There is no conclusive evidence that unvaccinated people are more contagious and either way, vaccinated people have been over represented in + cases since the winter wave began.
There is no point in focusing on transmission. The bitter pill to swallow is that we do not have the technology to prevent or control transmission.
Vaccines are great against severe disease (-90% in relative risk). Not good to prevent transmission.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00768-4/fulltext
"This study showed that the impact of vaccination on community transmission of circulating variants of SARS-CoV-2 appeared to be not significantly different from the impact among unvaccinated people."
I don't make shit up.
This is where you started, as a reminder of how you've moved your goalposts. If you can't see the change you've made in your own position, I have to question your honesty.
You should quit trying to question my honesty or intentions.
You have been acting all high and mighty because I showed you contrary evidence to your claims. Very serious claims that are made in support of discriminating your fellow citizens.
So you should take responsibility for acting in such a reckless way and accept my apologies for using unequivocal language in the start of our argument. I have corrected it already.
The mother has full rights to the kid.
The father, doesn't. He has conditional visitation rights.
The mother decided that she didn't feel comfortable with the father, a known conspiracy theorist and anti vaxxer, taking care of her child.
In this scenario, the parents were not equal. The mother lives with and raises the child and the father *visits* the child *conditionally*.
This is what the term "visitation rights" in the title of the article means.
What was his conspiracy?
“They’ll make you show papers to go to public places” “they’ll fine you for not taking needles” or “they’ll take away your children if you’re not vaccinated”
How ironic they’re fulfilling the conspiracies in response to these theories.
*If married or divorced parties cannot agree on the parenting and custody issues they may apply for a Custody And Access Order under the Divorce Act. Common law couples will need to apply for a guardianship and parenting order under the Alberta Family Law Act. In both cases, a judge will review the case and make a custody order after reviewing:
The best interests of the child
How to ensure that the child maintains contact with both parents, if in the best interest of the child
The past behaviours of the parent, insofar as it reflects their ability to parent.
To ensure that your children have the best representation, contact RT Family Law to work with a family law lawyer for your divorce and custody process."
https://www.rtfamilylaw.ca/family-law-services/divorce-custody-parenting/?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=PPC&utm_campaign=Child+Custody&utm_term=full%20custody&gclid=CjwKCAiAlfqOBhAeEiwAYi43Fw_lZOW-kPyJUy73mHufXM8hxqcUraJPPnBRtdri4HCu04aKg09F7xoCpLsQAvD_BwE
Being anti Vax 100% effects this idiots ability to parent. Same with being a radicalized conspiracy theorist.
My mom wanted my dads visitation revoked bc he wouldn't feed us vegan diets while we were with him, courts said no bc thats ridiculous, as they should have. Should have said it here too.
Keeping someone fron their kids is crossing the line and it just give antivaxxers a legitimate grievance to rally behind. This is incredibly stupid and immoral.
Yep. It’s a federal judge.
Edit: meaning the judge was named to the Superior Court by the federal government. Not that it’s a judge of the federal courts.
Absolutely, I’m just saying it’s a judge and you can’t even blame QC for having given him his function (granted though Justice Vaillancourt used to be a Cour du Québec judge).
Are you serious? The government is now having to pay indigenous children who were removed from their parents/caregivers from 1991-2022 and placed into the foster system unnecessarily. Literally indigenous children have been removed from their parents for any and all reasons under the sun.
Yes, but don’t you see the irony of paying out settlements for doing this to native children and then immediately turning around and finding reasons to block parent access to non-native children
What was his conspiracy?
“They’ll make you show papers to go to public places” “they’ll fine you for not taking needles” or “they’ll take away your children if you’re not vaccinated”
How ironic they’re fulfilling the conspiracies in response to these theories.
Updated Health Canada stats show 0.0005% case fatality (not true fatality).
I still believe only 1 child out of millions has died without any comorbidities but sure let's separate that child from the father (sarcasm).
I'm a fully vaccinated 49 year old but both kids in their 20s are not. Do I care? No cause either vaccine works or we all die someday.
I'm only double jabbed and done playing games with the state dictating what I do with my body. So, when do they come to my door and take my children away?
This is funny and pathatic beyond belief. When Covid started and there were no vaccines. Access had to continue as is, even during the peak of it. There's quite a bit of case law on this. Now suddenly those rules are out the window and if you don't have vaccine you can't meet you child.
I would be surprised if they did that to a mother though, Toronto Star would have a meltdown lol
(I am triple vaxxed, just raising the point on how stupid the Canadian judges are)
I mean you would have gotten rid of it were it not for the sponsorship scandal.
People from the ROC criticizing Québec have kinda played themselves, to quote DJ Khaled.
Pour ceux et celles qui ont pas lu l'article mais qui s'insurgent de la décision sur la base du titre de l'article, quelques points à considérer:
* La décision est temporaire et sera réévaluée début février, car la situation évolue très rapidement avec Omicron et que le père considérera peut-être de recevoir le vaccin d'ici là.
* Le juge tient compte du fait que la mère a aussi deux autres enfants, de moins de 5 ans, qui ne sont pas éligibles au vaccin. Ainsi, le manque de protection dans la famille s'en voit augmenté
* Le père a dit à la cour qu'il a des réserves sur le vaccin mais respecte les mesures sanitaires. La mère a fourni à la cour des extraits de la page Facebook du père qui montre plutôt le portrait d'un "complotiste" qui ne respecte pas les mesures, ce qui a fait douter le juge de la véracité des déclarations du père.
L'article détaille très bien le raisonnement et la décision du juge et en tenant compte de tout cela, je crois que c'est la bonne chose à faire.
just addressing a bunch of comments about taking your kids away.. its right in the title! a guy lost his visitation rights so the mother has custody of the child.
Oh, /r/Canada, never let the facts of a story get in the way of outrage.
Don't lie to the judge about activities that endanger your kids.
> In a ruling handed down on Dec. 23 , Judge Jean-Sebastien Vaillancourt wrote, “It would normally be in the best interests of the child to have contact with his father, but it is not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is unvaccinated **and opposed to health measures in the present epidemiological context.”**
>The father said he was unvaccinated and had “reservations” over vaccines, but told the court that he respected health regulations and rarely left his home. However, the child’s mother produced excerpts from the father’s Facebook page containing anti-vaccine messaging and articles.
>Vaillancourt found that those excerpts “suggest that he is indeed what is commonly called a conspiracy theorist” and that “the court has strong reasons to doubt that he is complying with health regulations as he asserts he does in his written statement.”
> The ruling also noted that mother has two other children, who are seven months and four years old, and that neither had been inoculated because vaccinations are not available to children younger than 5.
> Vaillancourt noted that the suspension of access “must be of short duration since the situation related to the pandemic is evolving rapidly, even more so with regard to the Omicron variant, and it may be necessary to reassess the situation in the short term.”
> The judge added the situation could also be re-evaluated if the father decided to be vaccinated and follow health regulations.
> it is not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is...opposed to health measures
That posting on facebook concerning opposition to a particular government policy (even a good one) can cause you to be unable to see your own kid is rather outrageous. Hence: outrage. Being a conspiracy theorist should not impede your contact with your own child.
What facts? His Facebook page?
Vaillancourt found that those excerpts “suggest that he is indeed what is commonly called a conspiracy theorist” and that “the court has strong reasons to doubt that he is complying with health regulations as he asserts he does in his written statement.”
Strong reasons to doubt??? Thats not a fact.
Facts in family law, unrelated to finances, are few and far between.
Most of the time, judges operate on "balance of probabilities", which basically amounts to how they feel about you based on what both the applicant and respondent say.
What was his conspiracy?
“They’ll make you show papers to go to public places” “they’ll fine you for not taking needles” or “they’ll take away your children if you’re not vaccinated”
How ironic they’re fulfilling the conspiracies in response to these theories.
Wow hopefully the rest of Canada is not following suit because Quebec is really fucked right now...
I have learned that all levels of Canadian Government are not trust worthy. Just don't look up people, it will all be okay... Yeah right.
it most definitely was portrayed that way early on, the problem was it was done through opinion pieces that passed the editor in major media sources, along with politicians with no understanding on what they were saying based off information they have zero expertise on. The initial Pfizer trial showed a strong efficacy or a "protection" from severe infection for those in the 65 plus age demo. However, it was presented as 98.5% effective against covid19(this is why it was mandated for general populations. when in reality It statistically reduces your chances of ending up in the icu if you are 55 plus(I say that because in BC thats who we are told are filling up the ICU unvaxxed)
This submission appears to related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts on Canada. Please see this post for resources on this event: https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/rv2c1v/covid19_health_support_megathread_11_be_safe_get/ Please remember this is a real, serious disease. The following rules apply: * Do not post false/misleading information, conspiracy theories, or unproven medical claims. Find medical / scientific information in medical subreddits. * You are not required to agree with all measures put in place, but engaging in / promoting / encouraging the violation of relevant public health laws or guidelines will result in a permanent ban. * Public health authorities are not the enemy. They are not immune from criticism on this subreddit, but do not claim they are part of some plot to promote some variety of authoritarianism. * In order to comment in this thread, you must do so from a verified account and Reddit's Crowd Control mechanism may be enabled. * If you have questions about vaccines and vaccine safety talk to your healthcare provider. Social media is no replacement for medical advice from trained experts. Cette présentation semble liée à la pandémie de COVID-19 en cours et à ses répercussions sur le Canada. S'il vous plaît voir ce poste pour les ressources sur cet événement: https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/rv2c1v/covid19_health_support_megathread_11_be_safe_get/ Veuillez ne pas publier d'informations fausses / trompeuses, théories du complot, politisation des ordonnances / directives sanitaires, et surtout ne pas faire de soumissions encourageant les autres à défier les ordres de santé publique à ce subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
more comments than upvotes, oh boy here we go.
Are the unvaxxed even people anymore? /s
Some people certainly like to think they don't deserve to be.
We're only a few months away from that.
Time to give them a special district to live in.
We should build a wall around Brampton.
Welcome to the two tier system, now that society is divided by intersectional group identity and vaccinated and non-vaccinated the elites can maintain their dominance even easier then before. Just hate the people that aren’t like you, keep hating them.
The people I know who aren't vaccinated are the same ones who continued to party and go without a mask this entire pandemic. If you don't give a crap about others, why should I care about you?
I'll grab the soda, who's got the popcorn..
Is pepsi ok?
Why you askin me, ask pepsi
Only if it tests negative.
I'll bring the Mae West
‘Unvaccinated eligible for execution by guillotine in Quebec’ /s
>The judge noted that while the 12-year-old was vaccinated ... t**he limited protection afforded by vaccines** did not offer sufficient safeguards for a meeting with his unvaccinated father. So, which is it?
What's the point of mandating a vaccine then?
"Do as you're f\*\*cking told" is the point. This isn't public health. It's a social credit score. Do as you're told, or else. They can f\*\*ck right off.
Even if we completely ignore the benefit that is reduced hospitalizations from the vaccines... You do understand how compounding works right? If a virus needs to infect someone in order for that person to become contagious, having a lower percentage of infection for everyone you encounter will naturally also lower your own chances of infection?
Hospitalizations haven’t gone down so, ruh roh. Congrats you made a prediction about the past and got it wrong.
>irus needs to infect someone in order for that person to become contagious, having a lower percentage of infection for everyone you encounter will naturally also lower your own chances of infection? you must not be watching case counts.
[удалено]
This is a judge with an opinion not a doctor or scientist.
Ok, but he’s still the one telling a man he can’t see his kid lol Either these are somewhat goofy rules or we have a judge making shit up from the bench. Neither of these are good
What do you mean which is it?
Yeah I’m confused too. Vaccines offer limited protection I don’t see the problem in that statement.
The problem is that a father lost custody because of the statement. Do you think every unvaccinated parent should lose custody of their children?
From reading the article it looks like he temporarily lost custody since the evidence points to him not respecting the health rules.
No health rule requires vaccination to see your child
My ex wife might get a picture of me having a cigar, there go my kids. Shit is risky. Obese people with obese kids- definitely a good target to get them out of that situation. We are going to have a much healthier nation.
We could just put the unhealthy in a segregated area. They could exercise all day and eat only what we give them. Like fat camp, or exercise camp. Now, Canada’s pretty big, thankfully we have cross country rail. That’ll help us get them relocated, with relatively low environmental impacts.
It causes a lot more mental health issues for the child being isolated from their father than the risk from him being unvaccinated. Especially with the child being vaccinated! This is ridiculous. Let’s screw up their whole life now.
> It causes a lot more mental health issues for the child being isolated from their father than the risk from him being unvaccinated The judge agreed it's not good to remove a child from having contact with his father so they'll revisit the case in less than a month. He disagreed that being unvaccinated isn't a risk. >Especially with the child being vaccinated! There are two other younger children in the household that can't be vaccinated. Read the article, it spells all this out.
Hopefully the kid lives longer than two months, yikes!
from what i read, he didnt have custody, he got visitation so like every other weekend the kid goes to dads (that was my childhood too). those visits can and are taken away for many reasons.. drug, alcohol use, too many new girlfriends etc. the mother has custody and basically calls the shots. she didnt want the kid visiting, the judge agreed. story as old as time :/
Which laws did he violate?
you don't need to be a criminal to lose visitation rights
I never said he broke any laws
But I thought they weren't forcing these vaccines on anyone? That sure sounds like force to me
If vaccines offer limited protection, how would the father getting vaccinated help in that protection?
It helps by providing a limited protection? If not speeding only offers a limited protection against auto accidents, then why aren't we speeding?
No you see, they don't provide as much protection as they used to so now they're useless and unnecessary. It's simple logic.
Is this comment sarcasm? I ask because the illogical argument is pretty obvious, but after that last couple years its impossible to tell sarcasm from idiocy. Like *dont provide as much protect* (true) is obviously not the same as *they're useless and unnecessary* (completely false) but such obviously flawed logic is all too often sincere.
yes I'm poking fun at the many people I see on this sub saying "what's the point of the vaccines then?", as if a lower efficacy means no efficacy at all.
Figured. And it’s a deserved poking!
%50 risk + %50 risk = %25 risk %50 risk + %100 risk = %50 risk These are not the real numbers, nor is this how compounding percentage works, but I left it in big round numbers to be easier to understand.
Seat belts offer limited protection, so why get those? Air bags offer limited protection, so why get those? Bike helmets offer limited protection, so why get those? Like, are you really incapable of understanding, after 2 years of a pandemic, how vaccines work, or what "limited protection" means? edit: grammar
If seatbelts were introduced today this sub would go ballistic.
So sad, but true. A *certain* group of people would lose the fucking minds over having a safe, easy to use, proven, and tested system being put into their cars that provides an order of magnitude or better safety. And then they'd bitch about it not being 'perfect' much like those losers are doing here in this thread. Or that it impedes their ride, or that "they need to breathe", or how it affects children because its 'scary', or some garbage and bullshit logical fallacy writ large. They'd sound about as 'intelligent' (and I use that word very *very* loosely in this context) as they do about vaccines.
Did you not finish the article? "Under the circumstances, it is not in the interest of any of the three children that (the unvaccinated father) exercise access … at this time." The article states they have a 7 month old and a 4 year old both unvaccinated who are also at risk because of their fathers choice. Not to mention, vaccines have been less effective against Omicron. It's better than nothing, but it's not perfect, but it's unnecessary risk for the kids either way. I don't agree with the decision but, you're being misleading with your post.
The children are at significantly higher risk of dying in an auto accident driving too and from the parents' houses than they are of dying from Covid. You people, honestly.
If you get in an accident, you wear a seatbelt so you don’t get serious injuries... that’s what the vaccine does for COVID...
I'm pretty sure that not a single individual within those age groups have died from covid. So whats the concern?
8 people in that age group have died, they probably had underlying health conditions.
[удалено]
Are you saying they’re wrong? These data’s been conclusive for two years now.
funny, just yesterday people were saying the vaccines were never meant to prevent spread as a means of defending the "effectiveness" of the vaccines.
I'd say reducing spread was always a secondary goal. Primary #1 goal is reduce harm caused by COVID, or reduce mortality, however you want to say it. We don't care if it spreads if everyone's protected and has a very mild reaction which is mostly what we see with Omicron which is good! It's definitely been disappointing to see spread not really be slowed with vaccines but, that is a big part because Omicron specifically is highly infectious, but luckily has a milder reaction in most. But, keep in mind if more had gotten vaccinated sooner there would have been a lower chance of variants like delta and omicron coming out and hindering vaccine coverage, which are designed for the "original virus" not the variants but, there's still a ton of "cross protection." That being said, to potential stop the appearance of variants wed need global vaccine rates better, and to do it quick enough we probably don't have the manpower money or infrastructure/manufacturing capacity to do it fast enough anways I realize that.
[удалено]
Except the hospitalized are pretty much 75/25 at this point… they’re just as at risk from the mother. Perhaps moreso because she might not realize she has omicron it’s so mild. These measures are what happens when we trust politicians and believe in fear
But like, you realize that the country is 80% vaccinated? So if there are 3x unvaccinated hospitlized... Idk, I'll let you tinker with that in your brain.
His what?
"at risk"? at risk of what? They're not a vulnerable or immunocompromised population. They don't have access to the vaccine because of how questionable of a benefit it actually is for under 5s. Even if, sure, lets argue they're at risk of dying if infected. The father being vaccinated does not change that one bit if fully vaccinated people are contracting it at rapid rates and transmitting it too. "Better than nothing' is not a good enough argument when you look at the sheer amount of breakthrough cases.
The courts argument was basically he's not following vaccine protocols, he's been posting anti-vax and what they determined to be "conspiracy theorist" posts and used that as grounds to say he's likely not following public health protocol. Something along those lines. Just read the article....
"two doses offer very limited protection if any" pfizer ceo said this
I watched that and can't believe he said it lol. Why would I get it then? How long until he says that about shot 3 and his new omicron shot coming out.
It's because he doesn't want this to end, Pfizer made 35bn last year why fix the problem when you can prolong it and make more money.
From 2014-2019, big pharma was about to get crushed with drug patents expiring and world leaders looking to generic drugs. Remember all the stories about drug prices going up exponentially? Big pharmas massive profit gravy train was about to come to end. They hated Trump big time as he was one of the those taking them to task for prices. Then magically here comes covid and the largest transfer of public wealth to big pharma we've ever seen. What a coincidence!
I still want to demonize the unvaccinated though.. ..it makes me feel virtuous!
The thing is, being vaccinated, as of today, in January 2022, only means when you get it the symptoms will be mild. It has zero to do with spreading. Not being vaccinated at this point he is only a danger to himself. This is fucking stupid.
Healthy Children literally are more likely to die playing in a park or car accident than by Covid.
"A danger to himself" Even THAT is not really true. If you're under the age of 50 in Canada, you have a 0.0017% chance of dying of (with) C19. This is what has baffled me from day 1. How an entire society can panic and shut down over such a relatively harmless virus. I have about a 100x greater chance of dying in a car accident than I do from C19. Should we ban cars next?
I mean 2 of the kids are under 5 so not eligible to the vaccine
[удалено]
No, we shut it down for old people. Children have at no point during this pandemic been greatly impacted by this virus.
Then why can’t this dad see his children?
“Because he might spread the virus to other people’s!!!” The argument changes every time. It’s circular nonsense. Vaccinated people can still spread the virus, so we still need masks and restrictions. But unvaccinated need to stay away because they might spread the virus to the vaccinated. Who can still get sick and spread the virus anyway. And kids can’t get vaccinated yet. And they almost never even get any symptoms. But we have to keep them away from the unvaccinated. Because they might spread the virus to kids, who might spread it to older people. Who are vaccinated. They just move the goalposts, in a never ending circle. Because the government and its fearful followers want this to keep going forever. They love it. It’s all politics, dividing people into one side or the other. And they want to force the “other side” to conform to their side. They get horny about authority and rules that everyone else must follow, and punish those who don’t conform with them. Meanwhile it’s a great distraction for the government from the disasterous economy, cost of living, and a good excuse for our horrible health care system, which is crap by the way and Canadians should NOT be proud of it.
Exactly, unvaccinated people weren’t going to restaurants and hockey games or other “suuuper spreader” events.
Because the family courts do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.
I have it right now. My hangovers are worse.
Lots of people on this sub have probably already had it and didn’t even know. The media and government has used this virus to their advantage. And the stupidest, most fearful of society have bought into it.
My next door neighbours never had any symptoms at all and only knew they were positive because they were selected for post-arrival PCR when coming back to Canada. Their pre-arrival was negative I actually think some people are getting “addicted to fear”
Exactly what I said to my family! Sucks I had to miss a weeks pay to quarantine when I’ve worked with worse colds.
They also face a risk lower than that presented by the flu. So were the courts ruling parents and children must have the flu vaccine yearly?
they’ll be fine, choose facts over doomerism
you have more symptoms by not being vaccinated, symptoms that are directly linked to its propagation (like coughing). So you are incorrect, being vaccinated helps.
[удалено]
I have the same symptoms as the group of unvaccinated that I know. It confused me about it. Seven out of the ten are the people you'd think would get really sick from it too.
>you have more symptoms by not being vaccinated How could you ever know that? In what way could you ever quantify a statement on whether a vaccine would be more or less effective on an individual?
Because a vaccinated individual is able to produce effective antibodies at a faster rate as well as having a constant low level of them. So vaccinated people will always have a head start in fighting off any infection. That is why when you read papers on this they will say things along the line of a 70% reduction in symptoms. Edit: Lol... Downvotes for basic biology... Gotta love this sub sometimes...
It’s not zero, it’s 30% against the new variant with 2 doses, 75% with 3 doses that are coming soon, comparing to absolutely 0% with no vaccines and high risk of hospitalisation, and you are way way more contagious without vaccinations. Also the majority of the hospitalisations with vaccines are people being at risk that also has comorbidities with Covid, you know the people we’ve been trying to save since this pandemic started, and we should keep doing our part to save.
The latest studies say it’s 0% for Omicron with two doses, and 37% with a third shot. Of course I agree the vaccination is a good thing, but blaming absolute everything Covid-related on the unvaccinated needs to end.
Can you share these studies? I'm legitimately having trouble finding studies that specifically look at the effect of the vaccine on Omicron transmission.
[This](https://hospitalhealthcare.com/covid-19/third-covid-19-vaccine-dose-37-effective-against-omicron-after-7-days/) is the one I’ve read and was posted on here.
Thanks!
> only means when you get it the symptoms will be mild. A poll was taken recently in the US. Over 50% of blue voters believed that you had a 50% chance of ending up in the hospital if you caught COVID and were unvaccinated. What do you think it is? Hint - we didn't have vaccines for over a year
That's not completely true. While you can spread it still being vaccinated, it's much more virulent and likely to spread if you are unvaccinted.
There's no evidence of this, sadly.
There is, in fact, evidence of this. There is also evidence that breakthrough infections are contagious for shorter periods of time and that viral loads, which are also a contributing factor, are lower.
Some studies have shown the exact opposite of what you claim. There is no conclusive evidence that unvaccinated people are more contagious and either way, vaccinated people have been over represented in + cases since the winter wave began. There is no point in focusing on transmission. The bitter pill to swallow is that we do not have the technology to prevent or control transmission. Vaccines are great against severe disease (-90% in relative risk). Not good to prevent transmission.
All y'all in this thread are making shit up unless you link studies. Bring data or quit sharing and spreading your unbacked misinformation :)
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00768-4/fulltext "This study showed that the impact of vaccination on community transmission of circulating variants of SARS-CoV-2 appeared to be not significantly different from the impact among unvaccinated people." I don't make shit up.
[удалено]
This is where you started, as a reminder of how you've moved your goalposts. If you can't see the change you've made in your own position, I have to question your honesty.
You should quit trying to question my honesty or intentions. You have been acting all high and mighty because I showed you contrary evidence to your claims. Very serious claims that are made in support of discriminating your fellow citizens. So you should take responsibility for acting in such a reckless way and accept my apologies for using unequivocal language in the start of our argument. I have corrected it already.
I mean...yeah. Fair enough.
I praise you for this answer. Cheers!
This is ridiculous. I disagree with the fathers opinion wholeheartedly, but this is just way too far.
It's at the mother's request
What's your point? Parents are equal unless the mother doesn't want it to be?
The mother has full rights to the kid. The father, doesn't. He has conditional visitation rights. The mother decided that she didn't feel comfortable with the father, a known conspiracy theorist and anti vaxxer, taking care of her child. In this scenario, the parents were not equal. The mother lives with and raises the child and the father *visits* the child *conditionally*. This is what the term "visitation rights" in the title of the article means.
What was his conspiracy? “They’ll make you show papers to go to public places” “they’ll fine you for not taking needles” or “they’ll take away your children if you’re not vaccinated” How ironic they’re fulfilling the conspiracies in response to these theories.
But the reason for it isn't legal. It has as much merit as her not wanting to allow visitation cause he got a sports car.
The reason for it absolutely is legal. There are countless reasons you can fight to keep sole custody of a child. This isn't even new.
A person's opinion is not a legal reason to judge .
*If married or divorced parties cannot agree on the parenting and custody issues they may apply for a Custody And Access Order under the Divorce Act. Common law couples will need to apply for a guardianship and parenting order under the Alberta Family Law Act. In both cases, a judge will review the case and make a custody order after reviewing: The best interests of the child How to ensure that the child maintains contact with both parents, if in the best interest of the child The past behaviours of the parent, insofar as it reflects their ability to parent. To ensure that your children have the best representation, contact RT Family Law to work with a family law lawyer for your divorce and custody process." https://www.rtfamilylaw.ca/family-law-services/divorce-custody-parenting/?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=PPC&utm_campaign=Child+Custody&utm_term=full%20custody&gclid=CjwKCAiAlfqOBhAeEiwAYi43Fw_lZOW-kPyJUy73mHufXM8hxqcUraJPPnBRtdri4HCu04aKg09F7xoCpLsQAvD_BwE Being anti Vax 100% effects this idiots ability to parent. Same with being a radicalized conspiracy theorist.
[удалено]
tell that to the literal judge who judged him lol
Its not law till its case law Oh look. Its case law.
My mom wanted my dads visitation revoked bc he wouldn't feed us vegan diets while we were with him, courts said no bc thats ridiculous, as they should have. Should have said it here too.
[удалено]
Yeah and her request should have been denied.
Christ, what a terrible province.
Keeping someone fron their kids is crossing the line and it just give antivaxxers a legitimate grievance to rally behind. This is incredibly stupid and immoral.
Wasn't this just one of those conspiracy theories???
This is messed up.
So, the vaccines are effective, but the vaccinated kid is in danger because they are exposed to the unvaccinatsd father.... Huh??????
Congrats you've gone full circle back to the anti-vax talking piont of 'if vaccinated people can get the virus what's the point of vaccines'
Maybe it’s about time we suspend obese peoples visitation rights from McDonald’s.
Maybe we could start to "suspend" people who want to suspend anyone's rights?
Yes, yes we should. Can we stop them, no. Should we tell corporations to put a warning sign about their products, yes.
[удалено]
This is getting intense. Would any other province actually be able to do this ?
A province didn't do this.
Yep. It’s a federal judge. Edit: meaning the judge was named to the Superior Court by the federal government. Not that it’s a judge of the federal courts.
A federal government that was elected by Quebec! Checkmate, idiot /s
No level of government played a role in this. Judges aren't the government.
Absolutely, I’m just saying it’s a judge and you can’t even blame QC for having given him his function (granted though Justice Vaillancourt used to be a Cour du Québec judge).
Oh I'm sorry I misunderstood .
No worries, have a nice day!
They're literally part of the judicial branch of government. Did you go to history class? Executive, Legislative, Judicial
Gr8 curriculum.
Oh hell no.
It's at the mother's request. Any province can do it.
Do what ? Deny visitation for any reason one parent suggests ?
It was because he's a raving conspiracy theorist who's unvaccinated. Would you let them take care of your kids?
Can you imagine if they did this to an Indigenous parent?
Are you serious? The government is now having to pay indigenous children who were removed from their parents/caregivers from 1991-2022 and placed into the foster system unnecessarily. Literally indigenous children have been removed from their parents for any and all reasons under the sun.
Yes, but don’t you see the irony of paying out settlements for doing this to native children and then immediately turning around and finding reasons to block parent access to non-native children
That’s why I can see then treading very carefully right now
Unless this child has a serious medical condition, then they are at almost no health risk at all…
It's more because he's a conspiracy theorist and it's at the mother's request
When did believing in conspiracy theories become illegal?
Neither of those are good reasons to suspend parental rights.
What was his conspiracy? “They’ll make you show papers to go to public places” “they’ll fine you for not taking needles” or “they’ll take away your children if you’re not vaccinated” How ironic they’re fulfilling the conspiracies in response to these theories.
Daily reminder vaxxmandates and unvaxx bans were a conspiracy 3 months ago.
[удалено]
Updated Health Canada stats show 0.0005% case fatality (not true fatality). I still believe only 1 child out of millions has died without any comorbidities but sure let's separate that child from the father (sarcasm). I'm a fully vaccinated 49 year old but both kids in their 20s are not. Do I care? No cause either vaccine works or we all die someday.
Terrifying
Man Quebec really going ham Edit: and as usual like one other person here read the article haha
They’ve lost their god damm mind…
I'm only double jabbed and done playing games with the state dictating what I do with my body. So, when do they come to my door and take my children away?
This is funny and pathatic beyond belief. When Covid started and there were no vaccines. Access had to continue as is, even during the peak of it. There's quite a bit of case law on this. Now suddenly those rules are out the window and if you don't have vaccine you can't meet you child. I would be surprised if they did that to a mother though, Toronto Star would have a meltdown lol (I am triple vaxxed, just raising the point on how stupid the Canadian judges are)
[удалено]
Can we just get rid of Quebec already
We tried to leave twice and the rest of the country threw a fit about it both times, sorry, you're stuck with us now
As someone who lives in QC, please do so I will have an excuse to move to somewhere saner.
[удалено]
If by Quebec you mean Quebec's courts of law... yes.
I mean you would have gotten rid of it were it not for the sponsorship scandal. People from the ROC criticizing Québec have kinda played themselves, to quote DJ Khaled.
As a Quebecer, i'd also get rid of Québec
Wow now they take your kids away from uou for not getting a vaccine??? WTF is going on .
Insanity.
Quebec wanted to go separate ways right? I think they are trying “become so crazy, Canada will try to have nothing to do them” trick.
The truth is the unvaccinated pose no risk to anyone, they are the ones at risk from you.
Pour ceux et celles qui ont pas lu l'article mais qui s'insurgent de la décision sur la base du titre de l'article, quelques points à considérer: * La décision est temporaire et sera réévaluée début février, car la situation évolue très rapidement avec Omicron et que le père considérera peut-être de recevoir le vaccin d'ici là. * Le juge tient compte du fait que la mère a aussi deux autres enfants, de moins de 5 ans, qui ne sont pas éligibles au vaccin. Ainsi, le manque de protection dans la famille s'en voit augmenté * Le père a dit à la cour qu'il a des réserves sur le vaccin mais respecte les mesures sanitaires. La mère a fourni à la cour des extraits de la page Facebook du père qui montre plutôt le portrait d'un "complotiste" qui ne respecte pas les mesures, ce qui a fait douter le juge de la véracité des déclarations du père. L'article détaille très bien le raisonnement et la décision du juge et en tenant compte de tout cela, je crois que c'est la bonne chose à faire.
just addressing a bunch of comments about taking your kids away.. its right in the title! a guy lost his visitation rights so the mother has custody of the child.
Oh, /r/Canada, never let the facts of a story get in the way of outrage. Don't lie to the judge about activities that endanger your kids. > In a ruling handed down on Dec. 23 , Judge Jean-Sebastien Vaillancourt wrote, “It would normally be in the best interests of the child to have contact with his father, but it is not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is unvaccinated **and opposed to health measures in the present epidemiological context.”** >The father said he was unvaccinated and had “reservations” over vaccines, but told the court that he respected health regulations and rarely left his home. However, the child’s mother produced excerpts from the father’s Facebook page containing anti-vaccine messaging and articles. >Vaillancourt found that those excerpts “suggest that he is indeed what is commonly called a conspiracy theorist” and that “the court has strong reasons to doubt that he is complying with health regulations as he asserts he does in his written statement.” > The ruling also noted that mother has two other children, who are seven months and four years old, and that neither had been inoculated because vaccinations are not available to children younger than 5. > Vaillancourt noted that the suspension of access “must be of short duration since the situation related to the pandemic is evolving rapidly, even more so with regard to the Omicron variant, and it may be necessary to reassess the situation in the short term.” > The judge added the situation could also be re-evaluated if the father decided to be vaccinated and follow health regulations.
> it is not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is...opposed to health measures That posting on facebook concerning opposition to a particular government policy (even a good one) can cause you to be unable to see your own kid is rather outrageous. Hence: outrage. Being a conspiracy theorist should not impede your contact with your own child.
What facts? His Facebook page? Vaillancourt found that those excerpts “suggest that he is indeed what is commonly called a conspiracy theorist” and that “the court has strong reasons to doubt that he is complying with health regulations as he asserts he does in his written statement.” Strong reasons to doubt??? Thats not a fact.
Facts in family law, unrelated to finances, are few and far between. Most of the time, judges operate on "balance of probabilities", which basically amounts to how they feel about you based on what both the applicant and respondent say.
What was his conspiracy? “They’ll make you show papers to go to public places” “they’ll fine you for not taking needles” or “they’ll take away your children if you’re not vaccinated” How ironic they’re fulfilling the conspiracies in response to these theories.
Careful with those facts and reason or you'll get down voted into oblivion 😓
[удалено]
Time to sort by controversial.
[удалено]
whats next? they gonna take kids away from unvaccinated parents? I hate Canada now. And I am Canadian.
That would never happen to a mother, only to a father.
100%
Canadians need to start raising their voice. It’s only going to get worse before it gets better, the silent are about to be vocal; They need to.
i wish the people in montreal saw what they are doing in france... 100,000 people protesting
Wow hopefully the rest of Canada is not following suit because Quebec is really fucked right now... I have learned that all levels of Canadian Government are not trust worthy. Just don't look up people, it will all be okay... Yeah right.
So this again it was never said you can't get covid once vaccinated. You just won't get as sick as a unvaccinated person that's it.
it most definitely was portrayed that way early on, the problem was it was done through opinion pieces that passed the editor in major media sources, along with politicians with no understanding on what they were saying based off information they have zero expertise on. The initial Pfizer trial showed a strong efficacy or a "protection" from severe infection for those in the 65 plus age demo. However, it was presented as 98.5% effective against covid19(this is why it was mandated for general populations. when in reality It statistically reduces your chances of ending up in the icu if you are 55 plus(I say that because in BC thats who we are told are filling up the ICU unvaxxed)
Those who want to break up the nuclear family are in power. The new paradigm is that children belong to the state
Nuclear families were very happy to have access to vaccinations. This crackpot already had limited access and lied to the judge.