Concerns raised that coercion may be risking those advocating for vaccinations

Thursday 17 June 2021, 12:03PM
By Ministry for Families

Ministry for Families is concerned that consumer advocacy groups and rest homes are putting themselves at risk by taking a position on the COVID vaccination.

Ministry for Families is a online organisation that seeks to protect the  'best interest of the family'.

“Whether you are pro or anti vax international laws state there are protocols around experiments and the vaccination falls under these protocols because it is experimental until 2023” says Ministry for Families Director Debbie Swanwick.


Following World War II and the Nazi war tribunals a code of practise was established around experiments - the Nuremberg codes. On August 20, 1947, the judges of the Doctors Trial which ran conjointly with the Nuremberg Trial set down ten points in total which became known as the Kodex. It includes such principles as informed consent and absence of coercion; properly formulated scientific experimentation; and beneficence towards experiment participants. It is thought to have been mainly based on the Hippocratic Oath, which was interpreted as endorsing the experimental approach to medicine while protecting the patient.


The Ten points of the Nuremberg code

The ten points of the code were given in the section of the judges' verdict entitled "Permissible Medical Experiments":

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.


Ministry for Families have approached several consumer advocacy groups, including Parkinsons New Zealand after receiving a phone recording in which one of their staff recommended the vaccination.


Their Marketing and Communications Manager, Helen Carter, has stated that consumers have the right to make their own decisions and they are not influencing them in anyway but have admitted to  forwarding research that only recommends the vaccination.


Similarly the Health and Disability Commission, and their spokesperson, Jaimee Burke, are refusing to address this issue with national service providers and will only consider independent complaints.  Ironically the Health and Disability Commission was established after the cervical cancer experiment on patients at National Womens hospital by Dr Green. Nineteen woman were awarded out of court settlements in that matter.


“This behaviour is very concerning to us, because not only could it be undermining the legality of the vaccinations, but putting at risk people who are coercing others to take or not take the vaccination - although the later is not deemed an experiment because it does not change the status quo. Informed consent requires that the person be given access to all facts and both sides of the argument, without being coerced in anyway. Coercion means informed consent has not been procured, whether that is a biscuit for taking the vaccination or a being given an opinion that sways them in anyway” says Swanwick.

"Rest homes seem to be the majority of complaints" says Swanwick. A client forwarded a cease and desist letter to Ambridge Rose Rest Home in Pakuranga citing the Nuremberg code and Director Allan Sargent ignored the letter and vaccinated the family member concerned anyway. Sargent cited that the enduring power of attorneys directives essentially overrode international law. The enduring power of attorney was another family member.

"We approached MP Simeon Brown to assist in protecting this elderly gentleman's rights, as he has also disclosed he doesn't want to be detained at Ambridge Rose, and wants to be with the family member who issued the cease and desist letter. She has offered for him to reside at her home because 86% of COVID cases are coming out of rest homes" says Swanwick.

MP Simeon Brown's office refused to intervene.


“Internationally we know that court proceedings have begun against people violating Nuremberg codes around the vaccination” says Swanwick. 


In Germany a group of tort lawyers are filing for damages against people advocating for vaccination on behalf of clients as a precusor to class action lawsuits which are underway in the US and Canada.