The Rhode Island Supreme Court has rejected an amicus brief filed in a case set to be heard on Thursday in which dozens of medical doctors and academic scientists argue that the risks associated with giving children the Covid-19 shot outweigh the benefits.
The case in question involves Lauren and Joshua Nagel, the parents of two daughters, ages 5 and 8. Nearly three years ago, Lauren and Joshua were granted a divorce by a final decree in September 2020. According to the former couple’s divorce agreement, both Lauren and Joshua would share in all major decisions affecting their children’s health — including elective medical choices.
Upon the rollout of the Covid shots, Lauren wanted to give her children the experimental jab, but Joshua did not. Unable to come to an agreement, Lauren sought an order from a trial court last year that would grant her unilateral authority to give her and Joshua’s daughters the shot based upon her pediatrician’s advice, which was to vaccinate. In her testimony, Lauren’s pediatrician claimed she was following guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and that she would change her recommendation if AAP were to change its guidelines.
According to its website, AAP — a left-wing activist health organization that’s advocated for pediatricians helping minors get abortions without their parents’ knowledge and harmful puberty-blocking drugs for children — recommends the Covid jab for most “infants, children, and adolescents 6 months of age and older.” AAP also advises parents to get their children
