Judge’s COVID motivated decision crossed a line
When Rebecca Firlit joined a virtual court hearing with her ex-husband earlier this month, the Chicago mother expected the proceedings to focus on child support.
“One of the first things he asked me … was whether or not I was vaccinated,” Firlit, 39, told the Chicago Sun-Times.
She was not, she said, explaining that she has had “adverse reactions to vaccines in the past” and that a doctor advised her against getting inoculated against the coronavirus.
Cook County Judge James Shapiro then made what the parents’ attorneys called an unprecedented decision: He said the mother could not see her 11-year-old son until she got a coronavirus vaccine.
The child’s father is vaccinated, the Sun-Times reported.
“The father did not even bring this issue before the court,” Fernholz said. “So it’s the judge on his own and making this decision that you can’t see your child until you’re vaccinated.”
This woman was advised by her doctor not to get vaccinated because the vaccine itself poses a grater risk than the virus.
The woman’s son is 11 and well below the age where there is a statistically significant risk from COVID.
But the judge ruled against the mother anyway because of her vaccination status.
This is well outside of the judge’s purview and is downright malicious.
I think this judge should be thrown off the bench for this.
Unvaccinated people cannot be treated this way in a civil society, but half the country clearly wants them relegated to second class status, even if they have a doctor’s note.