Force of the State
June 21, 2026
18 min
Full
326 of 364
June 21, 2026
Force of the State
0:00 / 18:34
Excerpt playback isn’t available for this episode — use the full-episode link.
Search the Record
Moment search isn’t open for this episode yet
When it opens, you’ll be able to type any phrase and jump straight to the second it was said.
Dr John Campbell Episodes Around June 21, 2026
Episode 326 of 364 — walk the feed in the order it was published.
18:34This episodeForce of the State
Summary
‘I should decide if my vulnerable adult son has a Covid vaccine – not a judge’
Sarah’s instinct to protect Tom, a 24-year-old with complex medical conditions, could be overridden by one of Britain’s most powerful courts
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/parenting/children/covid-vaccine-health-risks-court-heart-vulnerable-son/
‘They should be proving to us that it’s safe, not me trying to prove it isn’t’
‘All I’ve ever wanted to be is a great mother and to protect my son’
Mum Sarah and son Tom (23 years / 18 months LD)
Congenital heart condition
Chromosomal condition, Partial Trisomy 13
She dared to question whether the Covid-19 vaccine was safe for her vulnerable son
Nearly three years, Court of Protection
Whether the greater good – for Tom and society – will be served by him being injected
(despite complex medical conditions)
Sarah
Claims state being “heavy-handed”,
insisting it knows better than a mother.
Tom had all his childhood vaccines.
Her fear about the vaccine
mRNA suitable in multiple pathology?
Dentists, needs antibiotics
2021
Tom contracted covid twice, recovered quickly.
Sarah repeatedly asking medical professionals
“I went to talk to my GP about my concerns,”
“I explained that I was worried there was a possibility the vaccine could cause myocarditis or pericarditis”
“At the end of our chat when I said I was concerned about Tom having the vaccine, the doctor simply said he needed to tick some boxes for the relevant “agencies”. I didn’t think any more of it.”
A few days later
Social worker unexpected visit.
Then, a physiotherapist
Both questioned about why Tom had not yet had the vaccine.
“I felt they should be proving to us that it’s safe, not me trying to prove it is not safe.”
April 2021
Court summons,
signalling the beginning of a protracted and ongoing legal tussle with the state.
Judge Burrows
legal “impasse”
“on the advice given to clinicians by effectively the UK Government”
Sarah
“the risks posed by the vaccine were unclear and maybe significant.”
Judge Burrows
Tom was in an at-risk group,
“the evidence is that vaccines do give protection against serious illness and death.”
Whether Tom “may have made an altruistic decision to receive the vaccine to protect the community at large”