With the generous support of our donors, we are pleased to report that we have filed our Notice of Appeal in the Federal Court.
We will be arguing in court that it was not open to the Department to reject a duly certified medical exemption from a medical practitioner.
Since 2016, the Department has adopted in its policy, an extremely narrow and restrictive definition of medical contraindication, purportedly based on the Australian Immunisation Handbook, which states that the only two absolute contraindications are anaphylaxis and serious immunocompromise (live vaccines only).
However, in adopting this policy they have completely ignored relative contraindications. The Australian Immunisation Handbook when considered as a whole defines contraindication far more broadly:
A medical condition or risk factor in a recipient/person that makes receiving a specific vaccine potentially harmful.
That definition makes it clear that contraindications are not limited to the narrow list adopted in the Department’s policy.
Our legal action aims to restore the clinical autonomy of medical practitioners to allow them to use the full scope of their medical training, knowledge about their patients and family history, and their own clinical judgement when deciding if the risks of vaccination outweighs the potential benefits.
We know that there are some medical practitioners who may avoid writing medical exemptions due to their personal beliefs, but we also know that there are many medical practitioners and experts who are concerned at how impossible it is to get a medical exemption.
Taking this challenge to the court wouldn’t be possible without your support and we greatly appreciate every donation, large or small. Click or tap to Donate to Vaccine Medical Exemptions Legal Challenge.
Have shared & donated. Have lost my daughter; time to get the truth and justice: Federal Court challenge underway against mandatory vaccinations; to expose the harm and deaths to many people and children and probable false govt politicised science. Please donate & share. This action may lead to compensation for those parents who have had their children damaged or killed by duress from the govt by threatening non payment of child benefits, also by unfairly losing child benefits, by protecting them from vaccination particularly when a child has already been damaged or died. This may be the best way to expose the truth and seek justice.
Yes and I’m afraid fearful doctors need to understand their duty is to the patient. Too bad if that’s hard, but remember your oaths and fight for your patients. Public health has become used as a way to blur the lines regarding for whom medical practitioners are working. But when one duty conflicts with another, the patient must always come first.
https://rumble.com/vkorz0-freedom-fighter-court-victory-ends-masking-shots-quarantine-in-alberta.html
Please look at this court case in Alberta Canada It may help you have similar successes here in Australia.
I hope MTHFR will be included with this. Many GP don’t even know what it is. Never mind our fears of vaccination with it. Thank you
Clinical decisions are not clinical decisions if they are made by a central committee. Instead of seeing doctors punished for practicing medicine with a licence, it’s time we saw politicians, media, schools and business owners punished for practicing medicine without.