A Rhode Island resident named Joshua Nagel has filed a complaint with the state health department alleging that his family’s pediatrician used “thuggish force” when administering Covid shots to his young daughters. The Nagel girls were jabbed against their father’s wishes after the Rhode Island Supreme Court effectively sided with the girls’ mother.
As The Federalist previously reported, Joshua and his then-wife Lauren Nagel were granted a divorce by a final decree in September 2020. As part of the couple’s divorce agreement, both Lauren and Joshua would share in all major decisions affecting their children’s health — including elective medical choices. While Lauren wanted to give their children the experimental jab, Joshua did not, leading her to seek an order from a trial court last year that would grant her unilateral authority to give their daughters the shot based upon their pediatrician’s advice, which was to vaccinate.
While the trial court found Joshua’s refusal to consent to give the girls the Covid shot was not “objectively unreasonable,” it nonetheless overrode the divorce agreement in January, deciding it would be within the “best interests” of the Nagel girls to receive the jab. After rejecting an amicus brief from dozens of medical professionals who argued the “potential benefits of vaccinating [the Nagel girls] are far outweighed by the certain risks of harm to them,” the Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision on May 5.
In his complaint filed with the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH), Joshua is claiming that Dr. Colleen Powers and her assistant “forcibly restrained” his 5- and 8-year-old daughters during a May 9 appointment to receive the Covid shot, while both children were “pleading & screaming not to receive the injections.”
“Despite my 8-year-old’s plaintive appeal for an additional few minutes to get herself together, she was given no respite, and forcibly injected while sitting on the floor, screaming loudly, as Dr. Powers & her assistant restrained her,” the complaint alleges. “My 5-year-old, who hid under an examination table to avoid being injected, was extracted by force, and then restrained, again by both Dr. Powers and her assistant, & forcibly injected while the child screamed and yelled in protest.”
In an audio recording of the appointment, which can be found below, both girls are heard repeatedly saying they don’t want to receive the injection and crying in protest. It also appears to show Lauren and Powers attempting to coax the girls into getting the shot.
“It is healthy for your body. It is recommended by a large portion of the [medical] community,” Lauren said, to which one of the girls replied, “Just because it’s recommended by a large portion of the community doesn’t mean we have to do it.”
Later in the clip, a woman is heard telling one of the girls that they are “gonna have to hold [her] down” if she won’t cooperate. Roughly a minute later, the girl is heard shouting, “Let go!” while crying.
“I still can’t even listen to the tape because I can live through every moment of what happened that [day],” Joshua told The Federalist. “As a dad, [I] can’t protect [my] children. [I] have to watch someone harm [my] children,” he said, adding that he’s not allowed to “do anything about it.”
Shortly after the Rhode Island Supreme Court dismissed the aforementioned amicus brief, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced on April 18 it had withdrawn emergency use authorization for the original monovalent Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech Covid jabs and would be making changes to the current vaccine schedule. RIDOH acknowledged such changes in a fact sheet sent to state health care providers that same day.
This change prompted Gregory Piccirilli, Joshua’s attorney, to file a motion on April 19 to remand the matter back to the trial court, arguing that since the trial court’s order only gave Lauren final decision-making authority “for the original series of the vaccine,” the order itself “is no longer effective” and would require both parties to “confer again with the pediatrician to determine whether the booster is now recommended, and if it is, whether the parties will agree to the booster.”
The high court rejected the motion without explanation on May 1. Four days after that, the court ruled in Lauren’s favor.
“This Court will affirm the Family Court justice’s award concerning custody and the best interests of the child unless the trial justice’s factual findings overlooked or misconceived material evidence or were otherwise clearly wrong,” wrote Justice Melissa Long.
Following the state high court’s ruling — which reaffirmed the trial court’s decision — Piccirilli filed a motion with the latter to clarify its previous decision.
“Now that the FDA has changed the rules, it is illegal for the Nagel children to receive the first two-dose shot,” the motion reads. “Given these substantial changes in circumstances, there remains a question as to whether the children should receive any COVID-19 vaccine at this time. Instead, the parties should now confer again with the pediatrician to determine whether the booster is now recommended, notwithstanding that the original vaccine is now illegal to administer, and if it is, whether the parties will agree to the booster.”
The trial court rejected the motion, effectively allowing Lauren to get the girls jabbed despite Joshua’s objection.
It “hurts [to know] you actually have no right as a parent at all anymore. … The court took all my rights away as a parent because they felt my children needed [the Covid shot],” Joshua said. “The court system did not have the best interest of my children. They overrode what one parent feels and what medical [data] is showing.”
What the Science Says
Joshua explained that his opposition to giving his daughters the Covid shot stemmed from its experimental nature and the fact that both girls have acquired immunity to the respiratory virus through prior infection. Research has indicated that children are the least at-risk age demographic with respect to Covid-19 and are not super-spreaders of the virus.
According to the RIDOH, for instance, there have been zero Covid-related deaths among Rhode Islanders under the age of 25. Data from the state’s health department additionally shows that only 10 percent of the state’s 5- to 9-year-olds have received “at least one dose beyond the primary vaccination series.”
Notably, the Covid jabs have also been documented to have significant risks, particularly for young people. As a result, countries such as Germany, France, and others have recommended against “the distribution of the Moderna Covid shots for individuals under the age of 30,” with all of them “citing the documented risk of heart inflammation among young people as justification.”