Review of care plan — COVID-19 vaccination — global pandemic — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 4, 5 & 6 — Gour v Moss [2021] NZFC 12883 — Pearce v Bird [2022] NZFC 1042 — Watkins v Watkins [2021] NZFC 11934. This hearing was to determine issues brought by the respondent mother with regard to the child's care plan, and also to decide whether to have the child vaccinated. At a previous hearing the child had been declared in need of care and protection and had been placed in the custody of the Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki (OT). The Judge directed that the care plan review should take place at a full hearing to allow the mother an opportunity to be heard. The vaccination was opposed by the mother, who considered that a vaccination would be to the child's detriment given her neurological difficulties. A letter from paediatricians familiar with the child's care and needs recommended that she be vaccinated against COVID-19 to reduce her risk of serious infection requiring hospitalisation, given her history of breathing and airway problems. The Judge considered the principles in the Care of Children Act and concluded that given her vulnerabilities, it was in the welfare and best interests of the child to be vaccinated. Judgment Date: 2 March 2022 * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *