Judge Strips Father of Custody of Children Over Opposition to Masks

Editor

March 8, 2021

A judge in Windsor, Ontario, has stripped custody rights from a father because of his opposition to masks amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ontario Superior Court Justice George W. King denied the Windsor man — whose name has not been released — interim custody of his children because of his political opinions, which he argued would endanger them, CBC News reported.

***As the number of voices facing big-tech censorship continues to grow, please sign up for Faithwire’s daily newsletter and download the CBN News app, developed by our parent company, to stay up-to-date with the latest news from a distinctly Christian perspective.***

“The health and welfare of the children (and by extension their principal caregiver) should not be jeopardized because of [his] public behavior in promotion of his opinions,” the justice argued.

King went on to note that — more than just his opposition to masks — the father’s overall worldview is problematic and speaks to whether he loves his children.

Pastor Jailed for Holding Church Services Amid Pandemic Restrictions

“I have concluded that the respondent’s behavior is dictated by his worldview,” he wrote in his decision. “Everything else is subordinate to that view, including, but not limited to, his love for his children.”

The judge suggested the Windsor man is free to voice whatever beliefs he holds, but made clear the government will step in when it deems those opinions impact his kids’ health.

Prior to King’s ruling, the father had custody of his children each week from Friday to Sunday afternoon. Now, though, he will only be permitted to see his kids three times a week at a supervised access center, where he will be required to comply with whatever guidelines are in place in the facility, such as social distancing and mask mandates.

Gerald Cradock, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Windsor, told CBC News the questions raised in this case regarding COVID-19 aren’t any different from any other health and safety concerns brought before the court at any other time.

“It happens to be about COVID, but there are these medical conditions that arise and ethical decisions that have to be made in the context of divorce and marriage and so forth that periodically flare up,” he said.

Nova Scotia litigator Candee McCarthy made a similar suggestion, adding that King’s ruling should serve as a prompt to implement laws on the issue.

Police Charge All Elders of Church for Holding In-Person Worship Service

“The big cases have been things like anti-vaccination or blood transfusions, so there is a series of case law there that the court can take direction from,” she said. “It’s just a different disease. … The fact that the judge published the decision, I think, is probably a nod to the bar to give us direction to how we deal with it outside of court and to create a case law about this, so there is consistency with the rest of the judiciary on how we handle these kinds of concerns.”

The justice said he made his decision as “a percentage of our population, including [the father], continue to deny the existence, significance, and/or impact of COVID-19.”

His ruling also handed complete power to make decisions on vaccinations over to the mother.

Newsletter Signup