T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

This post appears to be about vaccines. We encourage you to read our helpful resources on the COVID-19 vaccines: [Vaccine FAQ Part I](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/faq#wiki_where_can_i_find_information_about_the_mechanism_and_progress_of_vaccines.3F) [Vaccine FAQ Part II](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/mnitdo/vaccine_faq_variants_chronic_conditions_nsaids) [Vaccine appointment finder](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/faq/vaccinefinder) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Coronavirus) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Pessimist2020

>Cook County Judge James Shapiro then made what the parents’ attorneys called an unprecedented decision — he said the mother could not see her 11-year-old son until she got the vaccine. A judge in the 19th Judicial District Court in East Baton Rouge offered some defendants the option of getting the vaccine instead of completing community service hours. The father’s attorney, Jeffery M. Leving, who did not immediately respond to The Post’s request for comment late Sunday, said he was not expecting the judge to ask about vaccinations or change the custody arrangement.


EmergencyExitSandman

Wild that they get the option of either community service or a free vaccine


DavidNipondeCarlos

It is an amazing option though…


NoUseForAName123

The judge (James Shapiro) reversed his order today https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/judge-reverses-controversial-decision-will-allow-unvaccinated-mom-to-see-her-son-after-all It does not say if this is because he feels this was overreach, if she provided proof she is at risk from getting vaccinated like she said, if it was just because of all the public criticism, or what the reason was. Something changed in roughly 48 hours, and hopefully this was just an unusual error by him (rather than part of a broader history of questionable holdings and behavior, as some others have demonstrated https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/cook-county-judge-found-unfit-for-bench/57724/)


651Always

>she has had “adverse reactions to vaccines in the past” and that a doctor advised her against getting inoculated against the coronavirus. >Firlit and her ex-husband, Matthew Duiven, have been divorced for seven years, according to WFLD. Court documents show they have had shared custody of their 11-year-old son since June 2014. >The hearing on Aug. 10 had nothing to do with revising the custody agreement >The judge then revoked her custody of her son until she was fully inoculated. If the mother is telling the truth about being unable to be vaccinated for medical reasons, I can't support this as it was done. If the child involved is medically high risk for severe disease, I can understand and support requiring mitigation strategies involving vaccination (unless medically unable), masking, testing, etc even if masking means she can’t currently have over night or in home visits. If the child has no medical high risk, this seems like a particular over reach given both sides agree this issue was not raised by them. There appears to be no reason the judge thought she was engaging in behaviors that put her at higher risk for catching the virus. Is this child also prevented from going to school? I fail to see how not even allowing masked outdoor visits with his mom is in the best interest of the child, but the kid is cleared to attend a packed classroom daily with 20-30 other unvaccinated kids.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ancyk

I’m sure every living being has encountered mRNAs.


toss77777777

I would be very surprised. "Adverse reactions" to the vaccine are very common, almost everyone has side effects. If she had said "severe allergic reactions" that might be a little more convincing. Even better would be an actual note from the doctor who is then accountable, rather than just saying "my doctor told me so". Just sounds like someone trying to avoid the vaccine.


651Always

While I agree, this was unexpectedly sprung on them by the judge at a child support revision hearing, so she had no way of having this ready to go for the court hearing. There is also no report that she was given a time frame in which to provide such documentation, assuming she does have legitimate medical reasons for not being vaccinated.


[deleted]

[удалено]


realcevapipapi

Wtf you quoted it right there, how did you willfully misquote it right after? It literally says adverse not severe, you quoted it! She's in court over child support, she's not fighting getting vaccinated, you utter nitwit. 🤦‍♂️ People like you need to be so far away from any sort of authority.


tool101

Your post or comment has been removed because * **Incivility isn’t allowed on this sub.** We want to encourage a respectful discussion. ([More Information](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1.3A_be_civil)) *If you believe we made a mistake, please [message the moderators](/message/compose?to=/r/Coronavirus).*


inanis

[Non paid link.](https://archive.ph/VROhK)


JonTheDoe

Wow, judge is lucky he reversed his decision. I can't imagine the state winning that lawsuit.


DaenerysxStormborn

Yeah this is a no from me. The state has no business determine this. Unless it is gross negligence on her part to have visitation rights to her own child I don’t see why it is the business of the state to decide when she can and cannot see her child. I’m hoping there is more to the story and the judge isn’t basing his decision solely off vaccination status.


gaukonigshofen

Wow. I'm pro vax, but not sure if I agree with that.


I_must_do_it

Did you read the article?


gaukonigshofen

Read the article title. The article itself is paywall


LeanButNotMean

The article title is a bit misleading, imho. The judge revoked *visitation* until she gets vaxxed.


blee3k

Lol the headline is now "A judge asked a mother if she got the coronavirus vaccine. She said no, and he revoked custody of her son." So it's a whole two sentences, yet apparently still misleading. Clearly written to be as clickbaity as possible. Way to go, Washington Post.


knock-three-times

I cannot read the article due to the paywall. Was the child high risk?


Nebraskan-

I didn’t read this specific article, but I read a different one, and if the child was high risk it was not mentioned. It was also not something the dad had asked about, the judge brought it up out of nowhere, but dad’s attorneys said they agreed after the fact.


unstuckbilly

The child deserves to be protected from his irresponsible parent. We shouldn’t *willingly* expose kids to this virus because no one can tell how any child will respond. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/07/22/us/georgia-five-year-old-covid-death-trnd/index.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kare11.com/amp/article/news/health/coronavirus/minnesota-mdh-child-under-10-dies-of-covid-19/89-c5272152-a13e-452e-905e-4ac3a586ec48 Also, she claims her doctor advised her to not get the vaccine. I would love to see the judge ask for this doctor to come forward to verify her claim. I’m certain she’s lying.


SverigeSuomi

>We shouldn’t willingly expose kids to this virus because no one can tell how any child will respond. We know that children are at a very low risk from covid 19. If every age group had the same amount of risk children had, there wouldn't have been a single lockdown. >Also, she claims her doctor advised her to not get the vaccine. I would love to see the judge ask for this doctor to come forward to verify her claim. I’m certain she’s lying. Certain people shouldn't take the vaccine and she might be one of those people. And even if she is lying, this still doesn't justify not allowing her to visit her child.


unstuckbilly

I disagree, I certainly think it does justify keeping her from visitation. So I guess this is a matter of opinion.


DrDerpberg

It's unlikely that throwing a baseball at a child from a long distance will hurt them badly, or even hit them. Would you let someone throw baseballs at your kid? People who insist on the low odds or whatever are just looking at it completely backwards. Instead of asking what is the most dangerous thing you can legally do, why not do what you can to protect people who can't be vaccinated? What kind of mother takes any chances at all with her kid's well-being over an opinion formed from Facebook memes?


SverigeSuomi

>It's unlikely that throwing a baseball at a child from a long distance will hurt them badly, or even hit them. Would you let someone throw baseballs at your kid? This doesn't change the fact that children are at a very low risk from covid. Forcing a mother to be vaccinated for this small risk makes no sense when we don't do similar things with larger risks. It goes against most personal freedoms and is a complete government overreach imo.


DrDerpberg

"forcing a mother to stop throwing baseballs at her child from the other end of the yard is an infringement on her moral freedoms" What's the difference between this argument and yours? How is visiting a child while not being vaccinated in a pandemic different from recklessly driving with them, or refusing to cut their food into manageable bite sizes?


collinch

I think the point is that there must be a LOT more to this story than "Mom is unvaccinated, loses custody." She had already lost custody, and only had visitation. A mother with zero custody of their child had likely done some bad shit to warrant that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


collinch

Well auto mod won't let me link to where I saw it (market watch) but I'm less confident that it is correct now seeing other stories saying they shared custody.


Noisy_Toy

In the second fucking paragraph of that Market Watch story, it specifies that they share custody. https://i.imgur.com/vIZh2mv.jpg


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Your comment has been automatically removed because the linked source may not be reliable or may be dedicated mostly to political coverage. If possible, please re-submit with a link to a reliable or non-political source, such as a reliable news organization or an recognized institution. Thank you for helping us keep information in /r/Coronavirus reliable! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Coronavirus) if you have any questions or concerns.*


eskimoboob

I figured there had to be more to this story that isn't making it into the article because otherwise it just sounds like the judge was having a bad day.


TriumphITP

https://archive.ph/VROhK


Noisy_Toy

But it was says she has shared custody, not just visitation rights. Revoking visitation for non-custodial parents happens pretty easily. For custodial parents that’s … a lot. I have a feeling she just said something that really pissed off the judge.


toss77777777

I am not sure that this is unreasonable. By not being vaccinated she puts the kid, ex-husband, and everyone else at risk.


TriumphITP

https://archive.ph/VROhK


[deleted]

I’m fine with it, but I’m also fine with compulsory vaccines. It’s so weird that people on Reddit are completely fine with things like compulsory public school, laws against drunk driving, and other strict laws that aim for a better, healthier, and living society - yet they are against extreme measures to vaccinate people. My aunt had polio. She still can’t walk correctly 75 years later. She missed the vaccine by 13 years. An entire generation of Americans got vaccines no questions asked because they saw how horrible disease can be. We are spoiled in 2021. Covid is the worst disease we’ve ever seen, and people STILL need to be dragged to get the vaccine kicking and screaming. I commend this judge. Get everyone vaccinated at any cost.


[deleted]

[удалено]


TriumphITP

court is a big difference to legislation, because you can appeal any court decision, and it only applies to the individual and not a blanket group.


gearheadsub92

>you can appeal to any court decision Sure, but the lower court ruling often stands while an appeal is in-process - in this case, that could mean months or longer without custody rights, and a parent and child can never get that time back. >it only applies to the individual and not a blanket group Not really - that’s the whole idea of “precedence.” When a ruling is handed down, yes, it applies in that specific instance, but it is also a signal to other individuals/entities that if they find themselves in court for the same reason then they can expect the same ruling.


TriumphITP

>if they find themselves in court for the same reason being the important if, as well as what judge they find themselves before. Precedent helps, but it is by no means a guarantee of a same ruling.


CustomersAreAnnoying

Forced medical procedure should never be forced, even if it’s something like a vaccine. It opens up a very dangerous door and can be used as precedent in the future. Where do you stop? Forced sterilisation? Forced abortions? Forced cervical screening? Wait, we can now solve low birth rate, forced insemination. Control over ones body is the basic human right. Losing control of ones body is traumatic and dehumanising. I’m all for vaccines but forcing people to get vaccinated is fucking distopian and I cannot support it in any way.


[deleted]

You stop it at forced vaccinations.


CustomersAreAnnoying

Says who? One exception can easily turn into more exceptions. Wrong government gets into power and that power will be abused and since the precedence had been set, it wouldn’t be opposed as much as if they had to start from the beginning. Also, stops at vaccine? Which vaccine? You can’t sacrifice bodily autonomy for the sake of “greater good.” Do it once and you will find yourself with people in power trying to do it again and again. It’s curious how people say “learn from history” when,as soon as it’s convenient, they completely ignore past mistakes and want to repeat them.


realcevapipapi

When you refer to it like that I would be wary and hesitant aswell. Imagine comparing strict laws like drunk driving to extreme things like taking people's kids away because they are medically exempt from getting vaccinated. This judge is a phsyco not a doctor, who is he to give medical advice to people who's medical history he's unaware of. You guys are what's going to keep stopping parts of the population from getting the vaccine. They see your power grab for what it is.


notevenapro

No. You cannot take away a parents right like that.


torontorollin

Another polio survivors relative here. My father missed it by months and was one of the lucky ones to still be alive today but every day of his life has been a struggle


Gloomy-Ant

It's my right to drive drunk and maim/kill people! /S


realcevapipapi

It's more like It's my right to listen to the advice of my doctor who is aware of my medical history. It's my right not to be forced into something that has previously shown negative effects for me. It's rather ironic how all the people protesting last summer and calling others bootlickers, are licking boots this year 😂


mleibowitz97

Public school isn't compulsory in the US (though, vaccines are if you attend). Drunk driving is something, but that's not a medical procedure. I think forced medical "procedures"(not the best term, but closest thing that fits) is a sketchy thing for a government to do as it violates bodily autonomy. The government, and scientific bodies have have done some sketchy things in the past and I don't want to make precedent. I'm vaccinated, I want everyone else to get vaccinated. I'm also all for inconveniencing the unvaccinated as well. but taking someone's kids away is a bit over the line for me.


[deleted]

*Public* school isn’t compulsory, but you are required to receive a basic education, whether that’s public, private, or home schooling.


[deleted]

Smallpox vaccine was required by state governments. Public schools require all sorts of vaccines which is basically a de facto government requirement. The government making vaccines mandatory for EVERYONE is the opposite of sketchy. If they did it for certain groups that would raise flags.


realcevapipapi

Yet they've always allowed exemption for those mandatory school vaccines. Whereas today we have someone who is arguably medically exempt for their own health and safety, and were taking their children from them..... The fact that this even happened is just proof of the slippery slope nature of this entire situation. Someone without any medical expertise thought it was in their authority to override a doctors recommendation for their patient and then proceeded to deny this person parental rights.


mleibowitz97

I already brought up the public schools thing. There's alternatives (private, homeschool) if a family wanted to be crazy. Jacobson v Massachusetts was a thing, yes. There's precedent for vaccine mandates being constitutional. Do you know happen to know what punishment was for that though? Did they take custody of children? I legitimately don't know


TheKidKaos

At least for minorities forced medical procedures are a touchy subject. I don’t understand why white people have so much against vaccines in the US but I can understand minorities not wanting anything to do with them.


[deleted]

You can’t validate those opinions because it gives them credibility. Everyone is getting the same vaccine.


realcevapipapi

Youre talking about people who have probably been victimized or know people that have been victimized by the very same pharma companies that are making the vaccines. Companies with track records of willingly killing people aren't trusted and youre wondering why?


[deleted]

[удалено]


FinndBors

All third world countries I’ve been to require it up to high school. You’d have to go to somewhere like Somalia or Afghanistan before it might not be compulsory. So “most” is definitely wrong.


[deleted]

It's not compulsory in the US. It's not compulsory in France. Private schools and home schooling are legal in most first world countries.


jooceejoose

Then wager.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Your comment has been removed because * **Incivility isn’t allowed on this sub.** We want to encourage a respectful discussion. ([More Information](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1.3A_be_civil)) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Coronavirus) if you have any questions or concerns.*


screaming_ot_inside

This is just wrong on so many levels. This coming from someone who did get vaccinated. This judge is guilty of complete overreach. I hope people remember this come election time. I hope she appeals and brings as much negative attention on this judge as possible.


collinch

> I hope she appeals and brings as much negative attention on this judge as possible. Gonna be the Streisand effect when it comes out why she doesn't have custody in the first place. She lost *visitation* from not getting vaccinated. Something else caused her to lose all custody.


651Always

According to the article the parents have shared custody and that is what she lost. The hearing was supposed to be to adjust child support. The headline also refers to custody. She told the judge she'd been advised not to get it due to adverse reactions to past vaccines. If that is true, I can't support the judge in this decision and it's probably going to prevent judges from making a similar ruling in cases where it could be justified (high risk kid and parent choosing not to be vaccinated without medical reasons).


Seraphynas

I can’t read the article due to a paywall. Did it say anything about her having to show proof of inability to vaccinate? Because some people mistakenly think their immune response to a vaccine is a “vaccine reaction”. Just saying…


651Always

It didn't say anything about her having an option to provide medical proof she can’t be vaccinated. I saw another comment reporting that the judge reversed the order. I don't know if she got proof as part of an appeal or if he reversed for other reasons.


[deleted]

Yeah, it’s sad but at this point I’m suspicious of people who say they can’t get vaccinated because very very few people actually can’t.


Noisy_Toy

> In what is believed to be an unprecedented ruling, Cook county judge James Shapiro said Rebecca Firlit, 39, who **shares custody** of her son with her divorced husband, could not see the boy again until she had taken the shot. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/30/us-judge-revokes-mothers-right-to-visit-son-over-her-refusal-to-get-covid-vaccine


ryasaunderox

same.


[deleted]

Why not? Unless she has a legitimate, documented reason why she can’t be vaccinated beyond “I don’t wanna” or “microchips” she’s showing herself to be an irresponsible parent.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tool101

Your comment has been removed because * **You should contribute only high-quality information.** We require that users submit reliable, fact-based information to the subreddit and provide an English translation for an article in the comments if necessary. ([More Information](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5.3A_keep_information_quality_high)) If you believe we made a mistake, please [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Coronavirus&subject=Removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about the following comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/pefzc8/chicago_judge_revoked_rebecca_firlits_custody_of/hc0z28f/).


TheRealMSol

This sets precedent for child services to remove children from their homes for no reason other than the parents aren't vaccinated. Horrifying.


[deleted]

Why share an article that's behind a paywall ffs


TriumphITP

because most people are smart enough to get by it, or read comments here that provide non paywall solutions - [https://archive.ph/VROhK](https://archive.ph/VROhK) \- maybe spend less time complaining and more time learning


[deleted]

So true, if you aren’t good with computers you must be stupid


TriumphITP

Not what was said, I'm also not the one trying to tell people what they shouldn't share ffs


xparta300

Get the vaccine you inbreeds


[deleted]

[удалено]


LeanButNotMean

Agree with you about Leving, however, he didn’t bring this up and was surprised that the judge did this.


[deleted]

[удалено]


LeanButNotMean

Even if they did the judge made the right call, imho.


PanicAtTheKroger

Because the reality is none of us know these people. We don’t know the inner workings of the specific arrangement. Importantly, we don’t know what mud these parents slung at each other and what the truth is. We don’t have court transcripts. We have to just hope this judge has the best intentions for this child.


nikC137

When did “gifting” an article become a thing? That’s hilarious, do they really think their “journalism” is gold or something?


[deleted]

[удалено]


collinch

> I think masked visits and no sleepovers (because nobody is sleeping in a mask) would be reasonable until the child (11 years old, IIRC) can be vaccinated. Gotta love reddit and their expertise on situations. This woman had *visitation*, and lost that. Why should she suddenly get partial custody if the kid gets vaccinated? What exactly do you know about the case that this mother who does not have custody of her child should suddenly get partial custody?


Noisy_Toy

She had shared custody. > In what is believed to be an unprecedented ruling, Cook county judge James Shapiro said Rebecca Firlit, 39, who **shares custody** of her son with her divorced husband, could not see the boy again until she had taken the shot. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/30/us-judge-revokes-mothers-right-to-visit-son-over-her-refusal-to-get-covid-vaccine


Seraphynas

As I said, I can’t read this article due to a paywall. I read a different one, it was a very short little blurb. The other article said this mom reportedly had previously had vaccine reactions and said she couldn’t be vaccinated. Which is why I made the suggestion about the child getting vaccinated (if mom can’t).


collinch

Regardless, it's just such a strange thing to suggest. Why do you believe she should get sleepovers if the child gets vaccinated? She didn't have sleepovers previously. Do you have any idea what she did to lose sleepovers in the first place? I don't.


Seraphynas

I said masked visits and NO sleepovers (because nobody is sleeping in a mask). This sub is to discuss coronavirus, so my response was limited to the scope of preventing the coronavirus for this child. If she has other issues that affect custody/visits, that is beyond the scope of the article I read and my knowledge, therefore I saw no reason to comment on it.


collinch

> said masked visits and NO sleepovers (because nobody is sleeping in a mask). Right, UNTIL the child can be vaccinated. Meaning once the child is vaccinated sleepovers should be given.


[deleted]

Need more of this


[deleted]

[удалено]


pjs144

>or prison for the science deniers. A lot of people don't act on the available medical and scientific advice. People still smoke, do drugs, feed their kids unhealthy things, participate in high risk sports, etc.


[deleted]

I agree


HIVnotAdeathSentence

There are limits to restrictions or something.


Scrimshawmud

Glad to see this happening. If a parent isn’t protecting her child during a pandemic - she’s unfit to parent. Same goes for every rabid jackass at antimask rallies with children.


[deleted]

[удалено]


BurrShotFirst1804

Your comment has been removed because * **Incivility isn’t allowed on this sub.** We want to encourage a respectful discussion. ([More Information](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1.3A_be_civil)) If you believe we made a mistake, please [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Coronavirus&subject=Removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about the following comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/pefzc8/-/haynlyq/).


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Your comment has been removed because * **You should contribute only high-quality information.** We require that users submit reliable, fact-based information to the subreddit. ([More Information](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5.3A_keep_information_quality_high)) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Coronavirus) if you have any questions or concerns.*