In an unprecedented ruling, on Wednesday, a New Zealand court ruled that medical custody of a baby be removed from his parents and placed in the hands of the doctors supervising his care. The reason: The parents’ refusal to allow the child to receive a blood transfusion from donors vaccinated for COVID-19.

From ABC News:

A New Zealand court temporarily took away medical custody of a baby from his parents on Wednesday after they refused blood transfusions for him unless the blood came from donors who were unvaccinated against COVID-19.

The court’s ruling in favor of health authorities places the 4-month-old boy into the guardianship of authorities until after he undergoes an urgently needed heart operation and recovers. The parents remain in charge of decisions about their boy that don’t relate to the operation.

The parents’ legal battle has been embraced by anti-vaccine groups, who gathered outside the courtroom this week as evidence was presented.

New Zealand court temporarily takes away medical custody of a baby from his parents after they refused blood transfusions for him unless the blood came from donors who were unvaccinated against COVID-19. https://t.co/7fBFkWV0Pk

— ABC News (@ABC) December 7, 2022

The baby has a heart valve disorder and pressure building up behind his ear. Paul White, a lawyer for Te Whatu Ora who filed the application for medical guardianship said,

“His survival is actually dependent on the application being granted.”

Justice Gault placed the child’s medical guardianship with the court “from the date of the order until completion of his surgery and post-operative recovery to address obstruction to the outflow tract of his right ventricle and at latest until 31 January 2023.″ The parents will not be appealing the decision, as such a move would place the child in even graver danger.

According to the New Zealand Herald, Justice Gault declined an order sought by Sue Grey, the attorney for the parents, for the New Zealand Blood Service to establish a tailored donor service so that the baby could receive blood exclusively from unvaccinated donors.

A lawyer for the blood service, Adam Ross KC, on Wednesday described the request for that order as exceptional and without precedent. Ross said it would jeopardise the integrity of the donor service and open the door to ethically and clinically bankrupt requests regarding donor blood.

“It is a concern that an order like this can damage and will damage an excellent blood service,” he said.

“There’s also a slippery slope element to it.”

White said the safety of the vaccine has been proven medically and by the courts.

This is a harbinger of things to come, not unlike the number of cases brought by Jehovah’s Witnesses surrounding their refusal of blood transfusions even under dire medical need.

Despite the surety about the safety of the vaccines by the attorney for the medical concerns, more and more medical studies are being documented which show pronounced side effects of the mRNA vaccines. Most evident, myocarditis in young boys and men, and the development of blood clots in those who receive the second dose of the vaccine.

In Wyoming, a mother named Cornelia Hertzler has alleged that her Baby Alex developed blood clots and a staph infection after receiving a blood transfusion with random blood. This was also a case where Hertzler and her husband specifically asked for non-vaccinated donor blood to be used for their child, and had donors lined up to donate. Baby Alex grew worse and died soon after. In a curious move, the Washington hospital where the boy was treated has expunged their records, according to Hertzler.

Tech entrepreneur and vaccine transparency activist Steve Kirsch has written extensively about vaccine injury and the lack of proper reporting or misreporting that occurs around such cases. When data is not made available or properly documented, it prevents courts like the one in New Zealand from making truly informed medical decisions for the safety of children.

It appears to me based on a relatively quick reading of the decision, that the court made the “right” legal decision where “right” means in accordance with New Zealand law.

I don’t know enough about the issues regarding blood products to have an opinion on the practicality of donor blood in this situation, so I will abstain from an opinion on this.

However, it is clear to me that it is a tragedy that information on clots following previous transfusions are being buried (such as hospital records being deleted in the case of Baby Alex). Had this data not been expunged, it could have changed the outcome in this case.

Unfortunately, many more innocent children will have to die before the medical community starts speaking out.