MANDEL: Father who believes COVID-19 is a “scam” loses custody of his child


Watching people fight against having to wear masks or otherwise follow legitimate public health guidelines and you have to wonder about their poor children.Who protects them from this madness?

Well, at least the Ontario family court has a bad opinion of separated parents who are not acting in the best interests of their children. In the last case, a Toronto mother obtained provisional sole custody of her child – and $ 16,500 in legal fees – after a judge made a scathing decision against the father for dismissing COVID-19 as a “scam ”

“I am concerned about the respondent’s refusal to take the advice and advice of experts, particularly medical experts, when making decisions,” said the judge of the Superior Court of the Ontario Jasmine Akbarali in a decision last week.

“During a pandemic that the respondent refuses to recognize, it is more than one”scamdemic,“It is in the best interests of (the child) that decisions regarding (their) health, education and extracurricular activities are made by the parent who accepts the public health concerns presented by the pandemic. ”

The identity of the parents and the child is subject to a publication ban imposed by the court.

While admitting that he is a loving father, the mother went to court after worrying that her ex was endangering their child and other family members, attending large rallies to protest the measures taken around the COVID-19 pandemic.

On social media, the judge said, the father urged supporters to resist public health guidelines and claims that the World Health Organization should be held responsible for the genocide against humanity. He says the deaths from the flu vaccine are greater than the deaths from COVID-19. He also boasts of hugging strangers.

No wonder the mom is worried.

The father told the court that he believed the government had “overreacted” to the virus and that he agreed that his views could be described as “unconventional.” He also argued that children are at low risk for COVID-19 and that he is in good health and poses no risk to his child.

When asked by the judge if he would abide by Toronto rules to wear a mask in indoor public places, he said he had pre-existing conditions that prevented him from wearing one.

Akbarali was not convinced.

“In my opinion, he intends to rely on a fictitious state of health to avoid wearing a mask because he thinks that the pandemic is a”scamdemic, ” she says.

Akbarali referred to a historic decision made at the start of the pandemic by his colleague judge Alex Pazaratz who warned that the court should reconsider the custody provisions if a parent did not comply with public health precautions.

“There will be zero tolerance for any parent who recklessly exposes a child (or members of the child’s household) to any risk of COVID-19,” he wrote in March in the now famous decision known as the name of Ribeiro c. Wright.

Akbarali found that this father belongs to this category.

“I find that the respondent is not ready to follow the COVID-19 protocols in the future,” she wrote.

“Despite the messages from the government and public health concerning the risk of COVID-19, despite the applicant’s clear will to act in response to her concerns, despite the case law which suggests that the courts will take COVID-19 seriously, the Respondent preferred his agenda – politicizing a virus – during his parental time with his (child). ”

Because of his “complete failure and reluctance to follow the COVID-19 protocols, now or in the future,” the judge decided that the father could visit his child three times a week – but only by video. If the mom does not agree to resume face-to-face visits, she can ask the court – but only after being tested negative for COVID or isolated for 14 days and also agrees to follow government and public health protocols in the future .

Because protecting your child’s health is no hoax.

[email protected]


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here