A council has triumphed in a High Court lawsuit to administer a vaccine to an infant contrary to her mother’s objections.

Islington Council encountered a legal dispute initiated by one of its residents when it organized for her eight-month-old daughter to undergo standard vaccinations while the child was in the council’s custody.

The mother, referred to only as Ms S, had declined the vaccinations based on her conviction that they were connected to autism—a notion that lacks scientific validation.

During the High Court proceedings, Mr. Justice McDonald determined that failing to vaccinate the child would expose her to potential childhood diseases “at an age when she is particularly susceptible,” thereby siding with the council.

The baby, identified as P, has been under the guardianship of the north London council since February due to worries that her mother was unable to fulfill her or her elder siblings’ basic care requirements.

In July, the council suggested that the infant could remain with her mother in the family residence under its supervision, while a decision was pending regarding her permanent care situation.

Throughout this period, the mother continuously refused to allow her daughter to be vaccinated.

When the council proceeded with the vaccinations due to concerns for the child’s well-being, Ms S took legal action against the authority in an effort to block the appointment.

According to reports from the Local Democracy Reporting Service, the mother expressed in court her strong belief in a connection between vaccinations and autism or ADHD, claiming that children from ethnic minority backgrounds were particularly negatively impacted by the vaccines.

She further asserted that she came across evidence online indicating that 4,500 children had perished from preventable illnesses, which she considered a negligible risk compared to the nation’s substantial child population.

At the court hearing, Mr. Justice McDonald gently urged Ms S, highlighting that no scientific research substantiates the alleged link between autism and vaccinations.

Nevertheless, Ms S maintained her stance, arguing it was her prerogative as a parent to make such decisions, insisting that her daughter was “too small to be injected with vaccinations loaded with chemicals.”

She added that she might be open to allowing the vaccinations when her child was older.

The Children Act 1989 empowers local authorities to arrange for the vaccination of children in care even if parents oppose it.

While there is no legal requirement for children to be vaccinated, the NHS strongly advises parents to adhere to its recommended vaccination schedule for infants under one year old, beginning at eight weeks, to safeguard them against diseases such as measles, tetanus, diphtheria, and whooping cough.