Judge chides Quebec dad for taking son, 10, to 'Freedom Convoy' protests

Toronto Police mounted unit officers stand by as police take action to put an end to a protest, which started in opposition to mandatory COVID-19 vaccine mandates and grew into a broader anti-government demonstration and occupation, in Ottawa, Friday, Feb. 18, 2022. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld

A Quebec judge has ordered a father to stop taking his 10-year-old son to anti-mandate protests after he brought him to the "Freedom Convoy" in Ottawa during one weekend in February.

The court also intervened in another parental dispute involving the same child — in that case, his vaccination status was at issue — and ruled that the boy can get the COVID-19 vaccine as requested by his mother, against his father's wishes.

The boy's father, who shares joint custody with the mother, said he had wanted to teach him about freedom of expression and democratic values by taking him to the Ottawa demonstration.

But the judge ruled that it was not in the best interest of the child to be exposed to the risk of "physical violence" at those types of protests or the disparaging remarks made by some of the participants.

"The remarks made by the participants are hardly laudatory against the government and... there is a serious risk that it can degenerate quickly," wrote Superior Court Justice Nathalie Pelletier in her judgment.

The father defended himself, saying he couldn't control what other people say at anti-lockdown protests and insisting that if the situation escalated, he would have left with his son.

The "Freedom Convoy" lasted four weeks in the nation's capital, resulting in nearly 200 arrests and at least 110 charges for offences including mischief, disobeying a lawful court order, obstruction, assault, assaulting police, causing a disturbance by fighting/shouting/swearing, weapon possession, and dangerous driving.

Protesters also shouted "F-ck Trudeau" throughout the weekslong occupation.

The court ruling in the parental dispute, dated April 12, allowed the boy to get the vaccine after his dad argued there was a serious risk in getting the shot.

The father told the court he had done his own research online that showed harmful and "dangerous" effects the vaccine could cause in children and claimed there is no need to get the shot at his age, especially now that most public health measures in Quebec are ending.

He also submitted a file of his own "research" to the court, but the judge said it wasn't legitimate science.

"Scientific studies regarding COVID-19 published on the internet do not all have the same value and it is not because they are published on the internet that they are necessarily scientific studies," wrote Justice Pelletier. 

"The Court cannot establish a certain probative value of the documents filed by the father in this case. The court recalls that none of the exhibits filed by the father have been corroborated by specialized journals that they enjoy a certain national and international recognition among scientific peers."           

She added that recommendations from provincial and national public health authorities, which were filed by the boy's mother, are more reliable when weighing a decision on vaccination because "the opinion of the scientists expressed in these documents is validated by recognized peers not only provincially and nationally, but also internationally."

"The probative value of this evidence is far superior to that issued by the various documents resulting from internet links filed by the father."

The dad's beliefs about COVID-19 were indeed strong, the court ruling noted, as he had cut ties with his own parents, who had asked him to be vaccinated.

The dad's mother, a nurse, contracted the coronavirus and spent two months in hospital, including two weeks in a coma.

CHILD CONTRACTS CORONAVIRUS

The court also took into account that the child got infected with COVID-19 in February and had to stay home for about 10 days since he continued to test positive after the initial infection.

The mother argued that her son should get vaccinated in order to avoid putting other immunocompromised family members he comes in contact with at risk, including his grandparents.

She made the request in the middle of Quebec's fifth wave of the pandemic, when the Omicron variant was surging and leading to thousands of new infections each day.

Justice Pelletier said the social isolation and reduced access to school activities due to the boy's vaccination status "have a direct impact on the child's well-being, both physical and mental, but also on his immediate family."

"It is not enough to just look at the risks of vaccination," Pelletier wrote. "There are also all the inconveniences that arise from COVID-19 infection for the child, but also for the society in which he lives."

She ruled the mother alone can consent to vaccinating her son.

The two parents also agreed, according to the judgment, "that they will not disparage the other parent or make negative comments about the other parent and/or their entourage, in the presence of the child."