I am Proud of Being a Conspiracy Theorist

Life saving treatments are not the time to pander to parents derelicting their duty of care to their children. That's why you wouldn't do it. The top medical professionals have other priorities, suchb as SAVING THE KIDS LIFE.And that's why the parents behaviour here is so reprehensible.

It's not about asserting the supremacy of an agenda in refu sing the request. That's what that parents have been doing with their kid, using them as a political weapon. Their request has no basis in science or medicine and was rightfully refused and the state exercised its legitimate powers towards parents who are not acting in the best interests of the child.

It's not a take-away, people can't be demanding bespoke blood based on extreme beliefs, it opens the gates to insanity.

People believe crazy stuff like this all the time, children have died due to it. If these parents want to deny their child life-saving surgery due to those beliefs they could be facing manslaughter charges. To avoid that, the solution is to get the child to surgery under temporary custody. The parents are going to be informed of the progress every step of the way.

You don't have a "right" to kill your child with stupidity.

Yeah guys its all about the grift. For sure I know most people who have kids only have them so they can use them as a weapon against Big Government and Big Pharma when they're in a life or death situation. Really conniving the way the parents planned this all out, getting pregnant on purpose and all. Thanks Odyssey, I wouldn't have been onto them only for your sharp eyed assessment of the situation. 🤣

If there is no basis in science for saying unvaccinated blood and vaccinated blood are different, what is the medical argument for rejecting the request for unvaccinated blood? What is the medical benefit to the child of having its parents go through this type of stress and trauma just because the hospital is refusing to accede to the equivalent of a restaurant being asked for brown toast instead of white with the breakfast fry? How do these last months of drama help the child or future children?

Explain why it couldn't have been done? Since they're exactly the same thing then this was about one thing, power. The docs could have done this but chose to put this family through hell as a warning to others, as an example. It's bullying, its heartless and its despicable

Did they ask for blood from someone who never had covid? Covid can cause blood clots too.

How about reviewing the medications taken by any donors for any risk of increased clotting?

Why not?

Can you tell us how a national blood service is expected to function where anyone can demand blood from a specific cohort of donors based on a perceived risk without fully understanding all risks? Maybe you can 'go figure' that out while you hurl from the ditch baseless innuendo.

So go figure? Yes we did. Based on evidence. As the judge and medical professionals did.

Are we on the moral high ground? Well we arent in the cesspit of outright lies and medical disinformation and scurrilous innuendo:

"a meeting with a doctor at Starship hospital where a “support person” hijacked a meeting with the parents. The person pressured the specialists with theories about conspiracies in New Zealand and went as far as to claim infants were dying from transfusions at Starship hospital, the judgment said."

This is the CMO of New Zealands evidence:

”Dr Morley’s evidence (including her reply affidavit) is that there is no scientific evidence there is any Covid-19 vaccine-related risk from blood donated by donors previously vaccinated with any New Zealand approved Covid-19 vaccine, and there are no known or suspected harmful vaccine-related effects of blood from a vaccinated individual to a recipient of any age, after millions of transfusions around the world,” Justice Gault said.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/baby-blood-donor-vaccine-battle-judge-to-deliver-high-courts-ruling-this-evening/WG7T6AWM4BHU5PHZL37X2ZI374/

Versus this... the reasons why directed transfusions are not recommended:

Read the full article:

"If your child needs blood, all suitable directed-donor blood will be used first. If more is needed, volunteer-donated blood will be used. Children's transfusion service staff is not responsible for notifying parents of the number of directed-donor units available for their child."

This approach is not acceptable to the parents in NZ. They are endangering their childs life based on scurrilous medical disinformation spread by grifters about children dying from transfusions.

The word games continue.

No they arent doing their best to accomodate concerns such as the NZ parents have. In Minnesota they are in fact firm that they could not and would not accomodate their concerns becuse they explicitly state no guarantee of exclusivity.

We are discussing the NZ case.

Is the Minnesota approach acceptable to the NZ parents?

Yes or no?