Case (Coronavirus vaccination). A CCG v DC [2022] EWCOP 20

— DC was not vaccinated following the original court decision that, given the high risk of serious consequences, it would be in his best interests; he did, however, contract coronavirus (experiencing high temperature, pain, and some respiratory distress) and make a full recovery. On appeal, the judge noted that the parents' anxious reaction to the vaccination process was indirectly one of the factors illuminating DC's best interests, and ordered further evidence before reaching a final conclusion: "(i) How many injections is DC likely to require? (ii) Given that DC was most likely infected by the Omicron variant, is it necessary for him to have both an injection and a booster? (iii) Given his 'clinical vulnerability', is it likely that DC will require any medication or vaccination presently targeted to this particular group? (iv) Is it the case that vaccination, post natural infection by the Omicron variant, is likely to boost immunity?"
Full details available at: https://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/A_CCG_v_DC_(2022)_EWCOP_20?id=240722-2229