Our Stance

NHS100k believe in bodily autonomy and the right to give informed consent to any medical intervention. Evidence currently indicates that Covid-19 vaccines may reduce severe disease, and may reduce transmission. However, Covid-19 vaccines do not prevent infection, severe disease, or transmission.

It is up to the individual to give informed consent to any medical intervention. This should be based on the individual having access to all of the information, good and bad, that they need to come to such decision. The freedom to give/not give informed consent should be afforded to every individual (with capacity), regardless of race, religion, creed, belief, gender or career/employment status. Mandating a medical intervention removes such freedom. In the proposed government mandate, there are no exemptions based on religious or moral beliefs. This is an egregious infringement of Article 18 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.

Whilst the reasons for an individuals' personal medical decision are irrelevant, some may include medical issues (such as anaphylaxis) or religious/ethical concerns. Under international human rights laws, each individual has a right to give informed consent to any medical intervention, including vaccination.

NHS100k also unites colleagues across the NHS and wider care sectors to stand together in favour of bodily autonomy and freedom of choice. We stand against the mandate of any health intervention, including vaccination - instead favouring the individual to give informed consent for their own care. NHS100k.com consist of NHS staff (including non-clinical and non-frontline colleagues) and also extends across other services such as care workers and so on.

Each individual is responsible for their own care. It is important that individuals are allowed to give informed consent - free from any coercion. This basic human right is protected by international law.

Defining Consent

For consent to be valid, it must be voluntary and informed, and the person consenting must have the capacity to make the decision.

The meaning of these terms are:

  • Voluntary: the decision to either consent or not to consent to treatment must be made by the person, and must not be influenced by pressure from medical staff, friends or family.
  • Informed: the person must be given all of the information about what the treatment involves, including the benefits and risks, whether there are reasonable alternative treatments, and what will happen if treatment does not go ahead.
  • Capacity: the person must be capable of giving consent, which means they understand the information given to them and can use it to make an informed decision If an adult has the capacity to make a voluntary and informed decision to consent to or refuse a particular treatment, their decision must be respected. This is still the case even if refusing treatment would result in their death, or the death of their unborn child.

Courtesy of NHS.uk: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/consent-to-treatment/

Government Coercion

Given the definition above, it is clear to see that the government are removing your right to give informed consent to a medical intervention - instead intimidating and coercing you into receiving the jab. And on what basis? It is well documented that the Covid-19 Vaccine does not prevent transmission. Source: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00690-3/fulltext

The right to give (or decline to give) informed consent for a medical intervention is a fundamental human right. The principle of consent is an important part of medical ethics and international human rights law, and many of us as frontline clinicians afford our patients this basic right on a daily basis. This freedom should be extended to everybody, including NHS/Care/social work staff. It is important to remember that the Covid-19 jab does not prevent transmission. Source: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext

Once you allow a government to mandate a medical intervention, you set a very dangerous precedent that is hard to come back from. If the government can coerce you into receiving a vaccination that does not prevent transmission and does not prevent infection, what else can they mandate?