Enlarge image
A doctor performs a rapid test on a child
Photo: Sebastian Gollnow / dpa
Children are particularly stressed in the corona pandemic - they cannot be vaccinated yet, psychological stress increases at home, social contact and sporting balance are missing in homeschooling.
Again and again there are parents who fear damage to their offspring from the mask requirement or corona tests.
A mother in the East Frisian town of Aurich wanted to sue an employee of the health department for bodily harm - but failed before the Oldenburg Higher Regional Court.
That stated in his decision: Corona rapid tests are not physical harm.
The 1st Criminal Senate rejected the corresponding application by a mother from the East Frisian town of Aurich, as the court announced on a decision of May 10 (Az. 1 Ws 141/21).
The woman's application is inadmissible for formal reasons, but also unfounded in the matter.
There is no sufficient suspicion of bodily harm in the office - the rapid test was admissible.
Tests are overall proportionate to protect a large number of people from possible infection.
Certificate is supposed to attest to alleged psychological trauma
In the present case, the child of the woman from Aurich and classmates of the 4th grade had contact with a child who tested positive. The health department therefore arranged for rapid tests in the class the next morning. The mother, however, reported the information to the responsible employee of the health department. She also presented a doctor's certificate stating that, among other things, her child had suffered severe psychological trauma due to tests.
This could now provide a sequel: The judges see an initial suspicion against the general practitioner, who had certified the alleged trauma to the child after the corona test. The evidential value of the document was "extremely low," said the OLG. It is "more than questionable" how the doctor could have made such a diagnosis in the context of a single appointment. Rather, the process justifies at least an initial suspicion because of the issue of an incorrect health certificate.
The mother had tried other ways before the OLG: The Aurich public prosecutor rejected the prosecution because there was insufficient suspicion of bodily harm. The woman lodged a complaint with the Public Prosecutor's Office in Oldenburg, which confirmed the decision of the Aurich public prosecutor's office. Then the mother called the higher regional court, where she also failed.
Again and again, parents go to court in the pandemic.
Most recently, a case caused a stir at the beginning of April.
A family judge from Weimar had overturned the mask requirement at two schools in the city by means of an interim order.
He referred to the best interests of the child.
The case of the two students allegedly impaired by the masks had apparently been deliberately leaked to the judge.
In his judgment, the judge also relied on false allegations by conspiracy preachers, and the Thuringian Higher Regional Court (OLG) later overturned the much-discussed decision.
mrc / dpa