Tories warn jabs for all over 12s will 'pit parents against parents

Tory MPs today slammed the 'deeply troubling' plans to vaccinate all over-12s across the UK and warned it would pit parents against other parents and teachers with their own children 'stuck in the middle' potentially 'tearing families apart'.

A gloomy Chris Whitty warned yesterday that schools faced another winter of disruption and advised that those aged 12 to 15 should be offered doses of the covid vaccine from next week.

There are concerns that while parental consent will be sought, it will not be needed if the healthcare worker administering the jab considers the child is competent to make a decision themselves. Pupils will initially be offered one dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and will not get a second shot this year. 

Today Vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi sought to diffuse the row but admitted there would be crisis meetings between parents, children and doctors if there is a dispute over consent - and admitted that 12-year-olds will be able to refuse the Covid vaccine, even if their parents want them to have it. 

Cotswolds Conservative MP Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown told MPs he finds Covid jabs for secondary school-age children - and the rows it will cause - 'deeply troubling'.

He said: 'It will pit parents against parents. Parents against teachers with a poor child stuck in the middle wondering what to do, for very little benefit for the child themselves, with a lack of long-term data of the potential harm.

'And, above all, what really concerns me about this is the Gillick doctrine of treating children without parental consent will become the norm for a whole range of medical procedures.'

Fellow Tory MP Marcus Fysh has claimed it is a 'very dark day for our country' while Ian Duncan Smith said he is sure the vaccines diktat will cause disputes within families after Mr Zahawi confirmed the plans to offer a single Pfizer jab to healthy 12 to 15-year-olds during a speech to the House of Commons.

Conservative Dr Caroline Johnson replied: 'I have given many vaccines in my time, including hundreds more recently of Covid vaccines. Half of children have already had coronavirus and are very likely to get it again. Does minister really believe that vaccinating three million children to prevent an average of four days of school or less is really reasonable?'

Fury has erupted after ministers confirmed the jab plans from next week - with experts and parents warning it may lead to unvaccinated pupils being 'bullied' and could even 'tear families apart'.  

Professor Anthony Harnden, deputy chair of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), said there will be a 'grade of competency' based on age when considering whether a child's decision to take the vaccine against a parent's wishes can be honoured.

When asked whether he would feel comfortable about a 12-year-old child taking up their offer of a vaccine if their parent had not consented, he told the BBC Today Programme: 'I wouldn't feel comfortable about that.

'I think we have to be really careful that we go by the law, and the law clearly states that the child and parent should try to come to an agreed conclusion.

'But that if the child wants to go ahead or doesn't want to go ahead and the parent feels absolutely the opposite, then the clinician involved in administering the vaccine needs to be absolutely sure that the child is competent to make that decision.

'There will be a grade of competency from the age of 16 downwards, so 14 to 15-year-olds may be deemed competent to make that decision on their own, it's less likely that a 12 or 13-year-old will be deemed competent.'

Vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi confirmed the plans to offer a single Pfizer jab to healthy 12 to 15-year-olds during a speech to the House of Commons.

But he reiterated that the final decision whether to have the jab would be down to children - and not their parents. 

However, amid fears the policy could lead to family arguments, he told MPs: 'Whatever decision is made, they (children) must be supported. No-one should be stigmatised, no one should be bullied for making a decision.'

Mr Zahawi also reiterated the safety of the vaccine for children, saying the decision to offer the jab to 12 to 15-year-olds had followed advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI).

He said the decision had also been 'unanimously approved' by the UK's four chief medical officers - including England's Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty.

'We will now move with the same sense of urgency we've had at every point in our vaccination programme,' he added. 

Meanwhile, Health Secretary Sajid Javid said in a Tweet tonight: 'I have accepted the unanimous recommendation from the UK Chief Medical Officers to offer vaccination to those aged 12 to 15.

'This will protect young people from catching COVID-19, reduce transmission in schools and help keep pupils in the classroom.' 

It comes as parents, experts and teaching unions today warned of tension in schools after the UK signed off on plans to offer Covid jabs to healthy 12 to 15-year-olds — which will see children get the final say on whether they are vaccinated.

Around 3million under-16s are due to start getting their jabs from next week after Professor Whitty endorsed the move today, claiming it would  help prevent outbreaks in classrooms and further disruptions to education this winter.  

Doses will be largely administered through the existing school vaccination programme and parental consent will be sought. 

But children will be able to overrule their parents' decision in the case of a conflict if they are deemed mature and competent enough, which has caused fury.

Angry parents fumed against the move to leave the decision with young children who 'can't even decide what they want for tea, never mind' a vaccine, which carry small risks of side effects such as heart inflammation.   

Professor Simon Clarke, a microbiologist at the University of Reading who is in favour of jabbing children, warned that giving youngsters the final say could lead to pupils being bullied by their peers into taking the jab.

He told MailOnline: 'It will cause rows I think... You may end up in a situation where a minority, it will probably be the unvaccinated, get bullied and excluded by other children.'  

Earlier headteachers revealed they had already received letters from pressure groups threatening legal action if schools take part in an under-16 vaccination programme.   

The teachers' union NAHT demanded urgent reassurance medics will be responsible for concerns about consent and vaccination rather than being left to schools, which could lead to tension with parents. 

Children's rights campaign group UsforThem said it needed a 'cast-iron guarantee' from the Government that all parents would get the final say on whether their child is vaccinated. 

Professor Whitty revealed today that children will be able to override their parents' decision if they pass a 'competence assessment' by the medical professional charged with administering the vaccine. 

Under decades-old medical law used for other routine vaccines, youngsters get the final say if they are judged to have sufficient intelligence to be able to fully understand – and therefore consent to – vaccination. 

The scientific community has been split over vaccinating healthy children against Covid because the virus poses such a low risk to them. No10's own advisory panel said earlier this month that immunising healthy under-16s would only provide 'marginal' benefit to their health, and not enough to recommend a mass rollout.

The decision was left with Professor Whitty and chief medical officers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, who looked at the wider benefits to society, including keeping classrooms open. 

Outlining the decision to press ahead with the move in a Downing Street press conference, Professor Whitty said there were 'certainly no plans' at the moment to vaccinate children under the age of 12. Children won't be given a second dose until more data on the rare complication myocarditis becomes available.

Dr Renee Hoenderkamp, an NHS GP and mother, accused officials of 'giving up on science' by pressing ahead with the school roll-out despite No10's advisory panel ruling that jabs provide only 'marginal' benefit to children's health. 

Meanwhile, the UK today recorded 30,825 positive Covid tests, down by a quarter on last week's count. Hospital admissions fell by around 14 per cent in England, but deaths rose by around 36 per cent to 61. 

The chief medical officers said that even though Covid poses a small risk to children's health, the negative impacts of school closures on their life prospects and mental wellbeing tipped the balance in favour of vaccination. 

They have recommended under-16s initially only be offered a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine, which has shown to be up to 55 per cent effective at preventing infection from the Delta variant.   

A decision on second doses is still to be determined when more data is available internationally, with a decision expected by the spring term at the earliest. Officials will weigh up the risk of heart complications, which are slightly more common after the second shot.  

The programme in the UK has until now been limited to children with serious underlying health conditions and youngsters who live with extremely vulnerable relatives.  

Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the union NAHT, said schools must now get assurances that medical teams will handle the pressing questions and concerns raised by parents about the rollout to avoid tension.

He said: 'Now that a decision has been made, it is essential that the Government immediately confirms that the process surrounding vaccinations will be run and overseen entirely by the appropriate medical teams.

'Where parents have questions, including about important matters such as consent, these must be handled by those same medical teams.

'There must be no delay in confirming this otherwise school leaders will be put in an impossible position of facing questions to which they simply do not have the answers.'

Mr Whiteman added: 'School leaders are being put in an invidious position, stuck between parents, pupils and pressure groups, all while simply working to carry out their national duty.

'Schools must be allowed to focus on their core task of providing education to pupils. We would expect detailed guidance to be published by government clarifying all this without delay.'  

It came after headteachers said they were already facing backlash following the announcement.

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said: 'Many of our members have been receiving letters from various pressure groups threatening schools and colleges with legal action if they take part in any Covid vaccination programme.

'This is extremely unhelpful and we would ask those involved in this correspondence to stop attempting to exert pressure on schools and colleges.

'The question of whether or not to offer vaccinations to this age group has clearly been thoroughly considered and the decision on whether or not to accept this offer is a matter for families.'

Dr Mary Bousted, joint general secretary of the National Education Union (NEU), claimed the decision from the chief medical officers had come to late.

'While we recognise that a decision on vaccinating children needed careful evidential judgement, it would have been better if a decision could have been made earlier during the summer holidays,' she said.

'It will now be well into the autumn before the impact of the vaccination programme will be felt. Schools must be given timely and clear guidance for the next steps.'

She added: 'It is incumbent on the Department for Education (DfE) to make clear and usable procedures for the necessary parental consent. This is not the time for yet more incoherent guidance from Government.'

Professor Whitty and the CMOs in the devolved nations were asked to look at the 'broader' societal benefits of vaccinating schoolchildren at the start of the month after the Government's advisers ruled against the move.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) said immunising healthy under-16s would only provide 'marginal' benefit to their health, and not enough to recommend a mass rollout.

But it advised the Government to seek further advice from its chief medical officers about the wider benefits of vaccination on the pandemic, which was beyond the scope of its review.

In their advice to the Government, the UK's CMOs said they were recommending vaccines on 'public health grounds' and it was 'likely vaccination will help reduce transmission of Covid in schools'. 

They added: 'Covid is a disease which can be very effectively transmitted by mass spreading events, especially with Delta variant.

'Having a significant proportion of pupils vaccinated is likely to reduce the probability of such events which are likely to cause local outbreaks in, or associated with, schools.

'They will also reduce the chance an individual child gets Covid. This means vaccination is likely to reduce (but not eliminate) education disruption.'

They admitted the rollout will likely only stop about 30,000 infections among 12 to 15-year-olds between now and March.

But the vaccines will prevent tens of thousands more from having to self-isolate and miss school as a result, they claim. 

Modelling of the winter term estimated that without the vaccines there could be about 89,000 infections among 12 to 15-year-olds, compared to 59,000 with the rollout.

Without vaccination they warn of 320,000 school absences by March, whereas this could be reduced to 220,000 with the jabs. 

Dr Hoenderkamp blasted the decision on Twitter, adding: 'What disrupts school is policy; change policy don't inject kids with a treatment they don't need and may harm them. 

'Stop testing healthy kids. Only send home a sick child. Vaccine achieves nothing; kids can still catch and transmit covid and will get sent home when they do!' 

The CMOs think a single dose will reduce significantly the chance of a young person getting Covid and passing the virus on, with studies showing the Pfizer vaccine is 55 per cent effective at blunting infection in adults after one dose.

But they have asked for the JCVI now to look at whether second doses should be given to children and young people aged 12 to 15 once more data comes through internationally. This will not be before the spring term. 

Mother-of-three Amanda Duncan, from Birkenhead in Merseyside, said today's announcement made 'no difference' to her because her children would not be getting the vaccine.

She said: 'My kids can't even choose what they want for tea never mind anything else. Over my dead body will my boys get it.'  

Liz Cole, the co-founder of children's rights campaign group UsforThem, said she needed a 'cast-iron guarantee' that parents would get the final say on whether their child is vaccinated. 

'The CMO was very clear in his letter that there should be no stigmatisation of children or parents regarding their choice to take up, or not take up this offer, she added.

'There can be no scintilla of pressure applied to children to take up a vaccine particular where the risk-benefit is so finely balanced.'

Professor Clarke told MailOnline he welcomed the decision to roll the vaccines out to healthy under-16s.

'While most people who are vulnerable to serious disease from

read more from dailymail.....