The controversy over the vaccines against the corona virus came to the decision of the Jerusalem Rabbinical Court – when a divorced father objected to vaccinating his children against the corona virus and the mother demanded that they be vaccinated.
The story of the act: A divorced father and a ‘vaccine opponent’ appealed to the rabbinical court to ban his wife from vaccinating his two minor children against the corona virus.
The father, who is the guardian of the children along with the mother, attached to the lawsuit a fifty-page document with medical and legal justifications to substantiate his objection.
The mother, for her part, filed a motion with the court to allow her to vaccinate the children against the corona virus despite the father’s opposition, and attached the recommendation of the children’s family doctor, plus the recommendations of the Ministry of Health.
Members of the Jerusalem Regional Rabbinical Court – Rabbi Yitzchak Oshinsky, Rabbi Meir Kahan and Rabbi Yaakov Steinhaus – delved into the complex controversy and examined the issue both according to the laws of legal kashrut and civic guardianship, and according to Jewish law and its sources.
In a judgment that spans dozens of pages, the judges state that the main guiding consideration for the verdict is the best interests of the children. The well-being of the children precedes the well-being of one or even both parents, and the question is whether the well-being of the children in the medical circumstances is to be vaccinated or whether due to the side effects and future damages that may or may not be vaccinated.
In the end, Justices Oshinsky, Kahn, and Steinhaus wrote in the verdict: This is on the condition that the son whose adult – 15 years old – will agree to the vaccine and will not express opposition in light of his relatively mature age. “