How do you protect yourself from coercion in the workplace?
In the United Kingdom, and in all commonwealth countries, forced vaccination is illegal. Coerced vaccination directly opposes our laws on informed consent. These two principles apply to any medical intervention, including testing and masks. A medical intervention accepted through coercion may invalidate “consent” and create liability for the person who did the coercing.
Article 6.1 of the UNESCO* Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights states:
Article 6.1 - Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.
That’s quite a statement. In ordinary times, you would never need to use this but we are living in extraordinary times where your employer has been forced, coerced, brainwashed or tricked into thinking that YOU no longer have a choice about what goes in, or on, your body. So, let’s break down what this all means, so you can easily and quickly get the message across to those who would deny you your bodily integrity…
Meaning of ‘medical intervention’
That’s an easy one. The Collins dictionary defines intervention as “the act of intervening in a situation” and medical as “relating to illness and injuries and to their treatment or prevention.” So, vaccines and masks and even PCR testing would all fall into this definition, insofar as testing is being advertised as a way to prevent the spread of Covid.
‘Preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic’
In case there was any doubt, we can safely say that vaccines are supposed to prevent illness; face coverings are also being touted as a preventative measure; and those unnecessarily long nasal swabs are said to be used for diagnostic purposes (even though they are unsuitable for that purpose, according to the Lisbon Court of Appeal in November 2020).
What is ‘informed consent’?
Informed consent isn’t limited to human experiments, as per the Nuremberg Code. It is entrenched in our common law system and has been defined explicitly over decades. The NHS Constitution for England (updated 2015) states that every person has the right to […]
- accept or refuse treatment that is offered, and not to be given any physical examination or treatment unless they have given valid consent.
- be given information about the test and treatment options available, what they involve and their risks and benefits.
The Supreme Court stated, in the case of Montgomery v Lanarkshire (2017), that the law protects a person’s “freedom to decide what shall and shall not be done with their body” and that “decisions about medical care are not simple yes/no answers. There are choices to be made, […] and sufficient information must be given so that this can be done.”
… means consent given by a person 18 years or over who is of sound mind and has capacity to give that consent.
The exception to this is ‘Gillick competency,’ which allows a child under 18 to give valid legal consent, for instance, to obtain contraception without her parents’ knowledge or consent. Currently, the concept of Gillick competency is being abused to coerce school-age children into being vaccinated without their parents’ knowledge or consent).
… means information that is sufficient for, and relevant to, the person making the decision; that is, the person who is being offered (or told to have) a medical intervention: YOU.
Unqualified statements such as “vaccines are safe and effective and are the best way to combat COVID-19” are NOT sufficient information. Biased statistics and promotional material published by the vaccine manufacturers or stakeholders are UNLIKELY to provide sufficient information. The information should also be specific to the age group and health status of the individual (YOU), as each individual can react differently to the same treatment.
It goes without saying that, to give informed consent, you would need the information prior to giving the consent. So, being handed a Patient Information Leaflet (PIL) with the listed side effects after vaccination doesn’t count. Further, you would need time to digest that information before making your decision, so you should be given it at least a week before.
‘Free’ here means, specifically, that you are NOT coerced, pressured, forced or under duress or threat of any kind, such as losing your job, as a consequence of not vaccinating, testing or wearing a mask.
Meaning of ‘adequate information’
This is well covered in the Supreme Court judgment mentioned above and means information that is appropriate to the individual concerned, since each human being is unique in their potential response to any intervention.
‘The consent should, where appropriate, be express’
It has become commonplace for schools to send letters to parents stating that, if their child is on the premises on ‘vaccination day,’ this will be taken as consent for vaccination. This type of consent is known as ‘implied consent.’
Express consent means an affirmative verbal or written statement. In the absence of a strict legal definition of “where appropriate,” we must apply common sense and logic. Common sense would say we should be more cautious rather than less cautious,
when it comes to medical intervention for children. Since schoolchildren are
expected to be in school every day unless they are sick, it would certainly be appropriate for consent to be express, not just implied. Otherwise you have situations occuring such as in New Zealand recently, where many schoolchildren were vaccinated without consent “by accident.”
This express consent should apply to ALL medical interventions in schools, including testing, masks and vaccinations. And (notwithstanding Gillick competency, which doesn’t apply with coercion and lack of sufficient relevant information), the express consent must be from the child’s parent or guardian.
Finally, guidance to the medical profession in the UK is that informed consent should be obtained in writing, if possible. Therefore, if you are a parent or guardian and have NOT given your child’s school an express consent in writing for your child to be tested, masked or vaccinated at school, it should not be happening.
‘may be withdrawn… at any time and for any reason’
You can, quite literally, turn up to your vaccine appointment, take your seat, watch the newly trained vaccinator remove the vial from the packet, suddenly have a panicky feeling or a gut instinct that “I’m not sure about this,” and you can get up and walk away with no consequence whatsoever. That is your legal right, as explained by this short excerpt.
‘without disadvantage or prejudice’
… and when you change your mind, and withdraw your consent for any reason that you have no obligation to explain to anybody, nobody can subject you to any disadvantage or prejudice. They can’t sack you, bully you, or reduce your pay. They can’t refuse you goods, services or employment.
So, here is a template letter that you can adapt to your unique situation. We give no guarantee of outcome with this letter and it is not intended as legal advice. If in doubt, seek independent legal advice. This letter should only be used after you have received in writing a statement insisting that you are expected to vaccinate, test or wear a mask, or that you are being denied access to something because of your unwillingness to vaccinate, test or wear a mask. In some circumstances, we may be able to assist you in drafting a personal letter or email. Please contact us on email@example.com if you would like to request personal help.
By downloading this template you agree you have read the above paragraph, you assume full responsibility for the use and amendment of this template, you understand it is not legal advice and you agree to use and amend it sensibly to accomodate your unique personal circumstances.
* United Kingdom is one of the 193 Member States of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) and the Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights was adopted by its General Conference on 19 October 2005. See the full list of Member States here. Read the full text of the Declaration here.