Dachel Media Review: Autism's Forever Children Growing Up
Dachel Media Review: Still Debating Autism Rates, Spelling Jenny's Name Right

Uncertainty as High Court Judge Rules Two British Schoolgirls Should be Given MMR Vaccine

BritishBy John Stone

Last week a High Court judge in the United Kingdom, Mrs Justice Theis, ruled that two sisters aged 15 and 11 should be given MMR vaccine against their will and that of their mother, after an application by their father (now divorced). This replicates earlier ugly cases of this kind, however – as the girls’ lawyer pointed out – it is still hard to see how they can be vaccinated without their cooperation, as the law properly makes no provision for physical constraint.  She told the Mail on Sunday: “One of the interesting aspects of this case is the question of taking two healthy people and forcing them to submit to a medical procedure which they don’t want to submit to”. The decision may also go to the Court of Appeal.

The judge ruled that the girls were not competent to make a decision on their own behalf  but you wonder at the wisdom of the judge when successive Cochrane Reviews have concluded “The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate”: while the rhetoric of these papers was pro the vaccine, they failed to disguise the underlying failure to ensure that the product is safe .  Likewise, the bureaucratic line that MMR does not cause autism has been contradicted by a number of decisions in the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) , and notably in an Italian court case last year, uncontested by the Italian government.

Presently, the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) lists 63,438 events for MMR and 322 deaths: the limitation of the system is that as a passive reporting system cases are unconfirmed but also likely to be under-reported by fifty or a hundred times .  Although the British state has largely rigged itself against the acknowledgment or compensation of vaccine damage the UK’s Vaccine Damage Payment Unit were forced in 2010 to acknowledge the grotesque damage to Robert Fletcher from MMR after a battle of 18 years. Most years (in contrast to the US’s VICP which has paid out $2.5b since 1989) there are no payments at all, and any payments that are made do not exceed £120k (less than $200k). In the UK vaccination takes place effectively entirely at the risk of citizen, which is another unreasonable feature of the present system given the moral pressure on citizens to comply.

In an earlier episode British medical doctor and homeopath, Jayne Donegan, was brought into the defence of two similar cases, and was subjected to rough treatment by the courts. The reviewing judge, Lord Justice Sedley, dismissed her evidence as “junk science” and she found herself before General Medical Council on a charge of serious professional misconduct. In a remarkable reversal, however, the GMC panel completely vindicated her stating:

The Panel were sure that at no stage did you allow any views that you held to overrule your duty to the court and to the litigants.

 You demonstrated to the Panel that your reports did not derive from your deeply held views and your evidence supported this.  You explained to the Panel that your approach in your report was to provide the court with an alternative view based on the material you produced in your references.  That material was largely drawn from publications that were in fact in favour of immunisation.

 It was clear from your evidence and the evidence of your witness that your aim is to direct parents to sources of information about immunisation and child health safety to help them to make informed choices.

 You told us that there are many books by doctors and others in this and other countries who seriously question vaccination and they cite a lot of history, proofs and medical papers to support their arguments.  You did not use any of those publications because you did not think that the Court would regard those as satisfactory support or references for your recommendations.  You largely used what was available in refereed medical journals.

 The Panel is sure that in the reports you provided you did not fail to be objective, independent and unbiased.

 Accordingly, the Panel found that you are not guilty of serious professional misconduct.

This weekend Jennifer Horne-Roberts with her husband Keith Roberts, parents of the much missed Harry Horne-Roberts  , wrote to the London Times:

Dear Sir,

The Judge who ordered that children be given the MMR vaccine against their wishes and that of their mother is gravely mistaken.

 I was Counsel in the MMR/autism litigation in the UK, in a challenge in the High Court and ECtHR to the withdrawal of legal aid in 2004, which led to the abortion of a case crying out for trial in the interests of all the world's children. I am one of a handful of lawyers who read all the expert evidence in the case--which was a strong one, for the 1,000 plus Claimants.

 I was also UK Counsel for the Claimants--advising on evidence--in the US OMnibus MMR/autism litigation,some of which cases were won or conceded by the Defendant the US Government. The US Governemnt has conceded the principle that MMR vaccine can cause autism (as do other multi-vaccines). in numerous cases since.

I am also the mother of a beautiful,brilliant son, Harry, whose life was wrecked by MMR jab Pluserix in 1990, a drug previously banned in Canada as dangerous under the name Trivarix,but licensed by the UK Government in 1988. Harry grew up autistic, after a very bad reaction to the MMR jab. His great talents in art and music and elsewhere shone through. It was obvious to all who knew him that he had a brilliant mind behind his autism. He was most difficult to bring up, was hypersensitive and often very anxious, a common trait of ASD people. Most tragically Harry died aged 20 as the result of administration of psychotropic drugs without the knowledge or consent of us his devoted parents. Psychotropic drugs are not appropriate for anxous ASD people, who are not psychotic, yet they are commonly in use as a chemical cosh. Our darling son lost his life to the wrong-headedness of the medical profession under the auspices of the British State, and as guided by the pharmaceutical industry.

 The Judge's decision in point, if not overturned on appeal, also evidences a society which is neither free nor democratic.

 You are unlikely to publish this letter, which in itself is evidence that we do not live in a democratic and free society, but one dominated by vested interests and the vast profits they make at public expense.

 We should expect more from the members of our judiciary.


 Jennifer Horne-Roberts, Barrister, Temple EC4. Keith Roberts, Architect...........Parents of our most beloved Harry RIP

A version of this letter has now appeared in the Daily Mail October 18 2013 (added October 19).

For more on the unrespectable history of the British state and MMR vaccine visit the ChildHealthSafety website .


John Stone is UK Editor for Age of Autism.



They need to take this to the European Court of Human Rights. Vegans are protected under the equality act. How can the views of a belligerent minority group, based on faith and tradition, be held more important than the right of an individual, whose opinions are based on logic and morality, to not be subjected to an unnecessary medical procedure, that is not only scientifically controversial but is totally against her beliefs?

Emma Flavell

There is no way this can be enforced. If you are to force a procedure onto a healthy child you would first have to GUARANTEE the child will be as healthy or healthier after the procedure , if that cannot be done, then they cannot take the risk, and we all know that there is no guarantee, some more than others sadly .


In the UK can an older child become emancipated and then considered an adult - so the father would have no "right" to force her to do anything? Unfortunately, this would not help the younger child. I can not believe what a jerk the father is, it sounds like he is doing it mostly for spite. The judge also appears to be quite a jerk. Sure shows how just become someone is in a position of power certainly doesn't mean they are very bright.


Perhaps the mother or the girls themselves take their case to The European Court of Human Rights. It would interesting to see their judgement on this case after what can only be described as bizarre judgements in many of the cases they hear.


Would the decision of the judge be different if both parents refused to have their children vaccinated? And why did the decision go against the wish of the mother?

Elizabeth Gillespie


From Concerned Mommy's article re Alberta health care workers and flu vax mandate:

"in the case of a flu outbreak at a continuing care centre or acute-care unit... workers are given the option of taking the shot or anti-viral medication, or else they are told to stay home without pay until the outbreak ends."

If by anti-viral medication, they are talking about Tamiflu, some of the side effects include:

"Some people using oseltamivir have had rare side effects of sudden confusion, delirium, hallucinations, unusual behavior, or self-injury. These symptoms have occurred most often in children...Less serious side effects may include:

nausea, vomiting, diarrhea;
dizziness, headache;
eye redness or discomfort;
sleep problems (insomnia); or
cough or other respiratory symptoms."

And those aren't the only potential side effects.

That's what you want. You want your doctor or nurse or respiratory, physical or occupational therapist, or the person handling the controls of the MRI or CT scanner, or the pharmacist preparing your meds, or the radiologist reading your films, or your surgeon as he's operating (!)... You want all those people to be taking a drug that could - suddenly, as in without warning - make them hallucinate, confused, dizzy, unable to sleep, coughing, miserable with nausea and vomiting, diarrhea and headache and injurious to themselves (BTW is that a euphemistic way of saying - suicidal?), oh, I forgot, bleeding from the nose. Maybe they should also give these workers some Lariam just to make sure they're covered.


So the older daughter already HAD the MMR as an infant, and titers might show that she is fully immune to all three diseases--WHY did the judge (or the mom) not request a titer?

From the Daily Telegraph




14th October 2013

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter

Mother could be back in court after failing to give girls MMR jab on judge's orders

A mother who was ordered by a judge to arrange MMR jabs for her two daughters could end up back in court after she failed to meet a deadline for the vaccinations.

The mother, who did not want her girls to have the inoculations, lost a High Court battle with her ex-husband, who insisted they should be immunised.

In September Mrs Justice Theis said it was “in the best interests” of the girls, aged 15 and 11, to have the measles, mumps and rubella jabs even though they said they did not want them.

The judge gave the mother until October 11 to have the girls immunised, but a legal source disclosed last night that they still have not had the jabs.

The source said: “We can’t rule out further legal proceedings, but we hope the family will be able to resolve this without any more litigation.”

The mother, referred to in court only as Mrs F, could be held in contempt of court by Mrs Justice Theis if the girls are not immunised soon. The judge would have the power to fine or even imprison the mother if she was found to be in contempt.

Last month’s case was only the second time a court has been asked to rule on a dispute between two parents over MMR, and the first to involve children of such advanced years.
The elder girl, referred to as L, was given the MMR jab as a baby, but following claims of a link with autism made by Dr Andrew Wakefield in 1998, the parents decided she should not have a booster and her sister, M, should not have the jab at all.

Mr F changed his mind after Dr Wakefield’s research was discredited and became “increasingly concerned” that the girls were not protected, particularly after a measles outbreak in Wales.

The couple, who were married in 1996, separated in 2011 and the father began legal proceedings over the MMR jabs at the start of this year.

Concerned mommy

Interesting article on flu shots for Healthcare Workers.

cia parker

This is bizarre beyond words. The judge said that the health risks of measles were clear, but also that there was evidence of side effects from the vaccine. Many thousands of intelligent people have refused the vax for ourselves and our children, yet the judge says these girls and their mother may not be allowed to make a life-snd-death decision for themselves? Her decision that the girls should be forced to take the vaccine is obviously only to protect the vaccine industry, as the health risks of measles are so small, those of mumps and rubella even smaller. All of the hundreds of children who caught measles in Wales last spring recovered, as did all the children in the Texas outbreak. Royal Health statistics from before the MMR started to be given in 1988 show that decades ago only one or two died of measles out of every ten thousand who had it, most of them with preexisting conditions. What a crime when children are held down screaming on Merck's sacrificial altar! And the shills say that the word "holocaust" is not appropriate?


From a legal standpoint, I'd like to know how forcibly giving an injection to a young girl (or boy, for that matter) against her will is in any way different from forcing her to submit to female circumcision.

If they rule that it's legal to do an invasive procedure on a young girl against her will "for her own good," they will be opening the door to forced female circumcision on British soil.

John Stone


The judge would surely have had to come to an opinion on any evidence presented rather than her own views, and in this case she was having to adjudicate on an application made by the father, complicated by the fact that his daughters had their own strong views anyway. But we do not know what evidence was presented.

The strategy of the British state and Department of Health has always been to foist legal responsibility for such decisions on to citizens while seeking to persuade them by circulating false and misleading information about safety and effectiveness. But in fact no one can truthfully assert that there is a strong evidence base for the safety of MMR.

Of course, this is separate from the very serious civil rights issue involved here. When it comes to child competence there are supposed to be complex measures involved and it is probably not up to a judge to decide off their own bat.

Admittedly, there is so much about this case we do not know.


how can a judge rule that a child be given medication ..in this case a vaccine when it is NOT compulsory to be vaccinated in the UK? This is a bias and illegal ruling. Has this Judge done the research on this vaccine to give her the right to give an educated ruling on this subject. Has she educated herself on the alternatives? Has She educated herself on the cases for damage awarded to damaged children given this vaccine? i am sure she has not....this is not an impartial ruling but a bias one based on the judges own opinions / belief on this vaccine. This vaccine has being proven to cause damage, more damage than it could or can cure. The ingredients are unethical, immoral and poisionus to the human body...has the judge read the real list of ingredients? The illnesses this vaccine is suppose to 'cure' are ordinary sicknesses, part of growing up ans children hopefully contact them naturally and build their own immunity to them, they are not dangerous illnesses and cause les death / damage than the vaccine. This Judge needs to educate herself and not rule against children! This should have been thrown out of court.

Jenny Allan

As a point of interest, In Scotland the roll out of a campaign to immunise school children against flu using the nasal spray vaccine Fluenz, was suspended after complaints from the Muslim community about this vaccine containing pork derivatives.

The elder girl in the MMR vaccine case, explained to the Judge she was a Vegan, and therefore unwilling to be vaccinated with any animal derived substances. She was also concerned about possible vaccine side effects. At the age of fifteen, this girl is more than capable of making her own decisions about vaccines. In fact, in less than a year she can legally be married and have children of her own.

It seems to be quite ridiculous in a supposed 'democratic' society, that the religious concerns of a minority Muslim community, can completely halt a Government vaccine programme, whilst a UK judge overules and disregards the views of a near adult person who is a Vegan.

White Rose

So here is my analysis of the ingredients of this years Flu jab , and I was actually asked to sign off a waiver to say this was ok to put into my bloodstream , oh how I laughed .
Thiomersal .... the zyklonB of the US-UK alliance , yes its still very much in use because its so good.
Formaldehyde .... known as a carcinogen since time began & used all the time in vaccine .
Betapropiolactone .... "reasonably expected to be a human carcinogen" (IARC, 1999).
Nonoxynol-9 ….. is widely used in contraceptives for its spermicidal properties (it kills cells).
Octoxinol-9 ....a detergent , why in the world would you ?
Neomycin .... an antibiotic from 1949 Due to the inherent oto- and nephrotoxicity of these substances, systemic use has declined, as safer alternatives have become available.
Polymixin ...another antibiotic which is relatively neurotoxic and nephrotoxic[6] and are usually used only as a last resort if modern antibiotics are ineffective or are contraindicated.
Latex .... because immunologists are a sick bunch of sadists I presume .

White Rose

Justice Thief more like .

Jenny Allan


Quote from above:-
"Vaccination is in the best interests of the girls, Mrs Justice Theis concluded after a hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London."

These 'family' courts are becoming notorious in the UK. They are held in private with no members of the public present. Press representatives may attend but are not permitted to report the proceeedings!! In this case it is assumed the information was 'leaked' to the public by a family member or friend.
"Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming, who represents Birmingham Yardley and chairs the campaign group Justice for Families, said delay in producing judgements is a issue in family courts and that Mrs Justice Theis should have published the MMR ruling earlier.
"The delay in producing family court judgements following private hearings deeply concerns me and this is par for the course," said Mr Hemming.
"You cannot blame parties involved for risking being in contempt by letting journalists know when decisions like this have been made. But without the judgement, we don't know the reasons, the arguments, and people can't have an informed debate."

This particular Judge seems to have issued the court order, requiring the girls to be vaccinated, without any thought as to the practicalities of forcing them to receive an injection of MMR vaccine against their will.

There are other laws, not least the European Human Rights statutes, which preclude any use of physical force or restraint in cases such as this, and I very much doubt whether any UK doctor or nurse would be willing to vaccinate these children under any form of 'duress', which in turn could lead to criminal assault charges or litigation.

The only way this vaccine can be legally administered to these girls is by persuasion and with their cooperation. This case demonstrates that old saying 'The law is an ASS'.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)