Less is More

We may become overwhelmed by our family responsibilities and job expectations. Recall the adage that less is more, and prioritise your main role, in which you cannot be replaced.

“You can’t have it all,” used to be a saying to describe women juggling careers and motherhood. Mothers are caught in the conundrum of trying to be present for their children while having a successful career, all at the same time. It is very hard.

Anne Marie Slaughter, a Princeton University Professor, who got her dream job in the government in Washington DC, realised she could not “have it all”.

So she wrote an article called, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All”. Anne Marie’s article is searingly honest and revealing. Her video interview about her story is also very good.

It is not just women who can’t have it all. Dads are the same. We have to make a decision on what we are going to have, and what we are not going to have, and sometimes less is more.


Jason from Dad University gives us some great insight into the need, not for Work-Life Balance, but Work-Life harmony.

My son’s wife is struggling with recovery from post-natal depression.

Twelve months ago she was going really well, but when she had a relapse, my son had to make some adjustments in his priorities, because less is more.

My son is an engineer, and his company is very family-friendly. They allowed him to start late every day so he can run his children to school and in exchange, he loses his rostered day off. He can’t go surfing that day, but less is more, and better still, his wife is happier and getting better by the day.

Gary Vaynerchuk is a very successful businessman who gives some very good tips about work-life harmony here:

Recently, I came across the Australian Fatherhood Research Consortium and its monthly newsletter. In it, I found a great article called “Take it easy on yourself, Dad” by a father with a young baby juggling the challenge of being a father and successful in his work.

“As I write this, my little nine-month-old boy Jack is sound asleep, something that has been a rare occurrence in our household up until recently. I had been told by everyone to be prepared for the lack of sleep a baby brings to your life, however, being a shift worker gave me a sense of false confidence and I thought I would cruise through these sleepless nights with ease.

I was wrong! I was working 12hr days, studying, trying to be a good husband and father and it was slowly wearing me down. I found myself feeling really low and disappointed as I had a feeling, I wasn’t being the father I had imagined myself to be.

Even though our wives and partners often bear most of the workload with raising children, I felt a lot of pressure as a dad to be this superhero-type figure that doesn’t waver under pressure and will always be a solid rock that the family can rely on. 

My wife is amazing and seems to have an endless abundance of energy. She has handled the sleepless nights much better than I. It took some honest conversations with her and a hard look at myself to realise I was running myself into the ground. This was counterproductive to being a good father.

It was then that I made the decision to take a step back from some of the areas of my life that were adding pressure and direct more of my focus to being present with my son. That small change had a huge positive effect for myself and my family. I have realised through having our son that I can’t do everything all at once and it is ok to ask for help, take a step back and sometimes less is more.

I have found success in parenting my son through not being so hard on myself and trying every day to just enjoy the little moments I get with him. I can be the rock my wife and son need, but I’m only capable of being that if I don’t take on too much work and added pressure. 

After all, my first and most important job is being a father.”


You cannot have it all. Something has to take precedence. The key thing is to work out what is important to you as a father, and as a man with a vocation, because less is more.

Yours for the Important Things,
Warwick Marsh

PS: A massive thank you to all those who donated to our end-of-year Dads4Kids matching challenge. The stupendous news is: we met the target! The really good news is that your giving is going to enable us to help many more dads be better dads and put a smile on many more children’s faces.

Together we are making a difference! You can still donate today if you want to. Just that you will have to wait for a while for a tax deduction. Donate here!


First published at Dads4Kids. Photo by Kampus Production.

Thank the Source

Open Letter to Australia’s Doctors: Preserve Our Children

Open Letter to Australia’s Doctors: Preserve Our Children

Paediatrician Dr Dylan Wilson speaks up about the unethical practices of doctors who are subjecting vulnerable children to puberty blockers, with scant scientific basis, motivated by transgender ideology. He begs medical practitioners to reconsider before more of our youth have lifelong harm inflicted upon them.

Dear Doctor,

In Australia, we have a clear template of the standard referral pathway. General practitioners refer to specialists, who refer to sub-specialists. Whenever we feel we need a more specialised opinion than our own, we refer the patient to a colleague along this pathway. We can often choose to whom we refer; we may value a particular practitioner’s expertise on a particular matter, or we may know that someone may suit the patient best. This is most evident in the private system.

There are also times when we don’t get a choice, a patient has to be referred to a general service in the public system. While this may have issues, there are often benefits, and there are many times when referring a patient to the local public hospital service is in their best interests.

This is often true for children. Our tertiary children’s hospitals, situated in the state capital cities around Australia, offer not just specialised services that may not be able to be accessed elsewhere, but a multitude of services that can serve a child’s whole needs. It is recognised that for many diseases and conditions, a holistic or specialised service offered at a child’s local children’s hospital serves their best interests.

The simplest example is cancer; all children who are diagnosed with cancer are treated by a team of specialists whose concentrated knowledge and expertise, in a multi-disciplinary team, provides the best care. No one would ever dream of treating a child with chemotherapy without this team’s knowledge and input.


But there exists a service at my local children’s hospital, and at other hospitals around the country, to which I will never refer a child. I believe this service is not appropriate for children, and is actively doing harm, and this open letter is my way of reaching out to you to urge you to consider your role in this referral pathway.

I am talking about the paediatric gender service at my local children’s hospital.

What I mean specifically are the paediatric endocrinologists that are part of the paediatric gender service, but seeing as it seems you can’t refer to the paediatric gender service without a paediatric endocrinologist getting involved at some stage, the whole service needs to be included.

In Australia, as a country and a medical profession, we are completely behind on this. Many of you reading this will have little knowledge of what role paediatric endocrinologists have in treating children in this clinic. It may be that the first time it has come to your attention is during this election campaign, when old tweets by the Liberal candidate for Warringah, Katherine Deves came to light. In one she tweeted about “vulnerable children surgically mutilated and sterilised”. The uproar and backlash in the media were furious.

There is a simple reason why Ms Deves tweeted about children being surgically mutilated and sterilised.

It’s because children are being surgically mutilated and sterilised.

The backlash against this tweet focused on the fact that in Australia, patients have to reach the age of 18 before any surgery on genitals can take place. For the time being, let’s ignore the fact that having to reach the age of 18 before a patient’s underdeveloped genitals are surgically mutilated is not the stone-cold “gotcha” Ms Deves’s critics think it is. Let’s focus on the facts.

Around the world, there are girls as young as 13 who have had a bilateral mastectomy because of the dysphoria about their bodies. This has been done in gender clinics, and also by unscrupulous private surgeons, who as a marketing tool, might describe this surgery as “yeeting the teets”. Ms Deves probably knows this. There was nothing in her tweet that was specific to genital surgery in Australia. That’s something her critics inferred. Ms Deves thinks girls this age having completely healthy breast tissue removed because of their mental health struggles is mutilation. So do I.

Creating Infertility

And the backlash that focused on the “surgically mutilated” part, conveniently failed to address the part about children being sterilised. This is where paediatric endocrinologists come in.

The medical affirmative pathway for gender-diverse children is known as the Dutch Protocol, due to its beginnings in the Netherlands. It consists of three steps:

  1. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, commonly known as puberty blockers, to suppress the levels of LH and FSH, and thus suppress puberty.
  2. “Gender-affirming” or “cross-sex” hormones, usually started at 16, to “affirm” a child’s body with the appearance of the sex they wish they were; males get oestrogen, females get testosterone.
  3. Surgery, in a variety of forms ranging from simple cosmetic procedures to major surgery like mastectomy and genital surgery.

The problem is the puberty blockers and the problem is this:

Paediatric endocrinologists in gender clinics in Australia and around the world are taking a cohort of physically healthy children and they are suppressing the puberty of these children at its earliest active stage, Tanner Stage 2. Puberty for these children is never allowed to progress. The bodies of these children are frozen forever at this stage, even though they are growing chronologically older. Contrary to the popular belief, puberty blockers are not a “pause”. We now know that at least 98% of children who commence puberty blockers continue along the affirmative pathway onto cross-sex hormones.

When gender clinics say puberty blockers are reversible they are telling a truth, but they are being disingenuous. When they say puberty blockers are a “pause” to give children time to think, they are certainly being economical with the truth. They know that those children are now set along this pathway. There is no pause. There is no reversal.

The paediatric endocrinologist then takes that body, frozen at the physical state of early puberty, and masculinises or feminises that body, depending on the child’s sex.

They are creating a cohort of adults with children’s bodies, just adulterated by testosterone or oestrogen.

If a child has their body arrested at Tanner stage 2, how does that child develop fertility? The simple answer is, they can’t. We all need the later stages of puberty to fully develop sperm and eggs. They have been sterilised by medical means. They have been sterilised by doctors at our children’s hospitals.

If a child has their body arrested at Tanner stage 2, how does a child develop sexual function? The simple answer is, they can’t. They have been rendered sexually dysfunctional adults by medical means, by doctors at our children’s hospitals.

If a child has their body arrested at Tanner stage 2, then is subjected to abnormal levels of exogenously administered hormones for which that body is not equipped, how do they escape harm? The simple answer is, they can’t. They have been committed to a lifetime of hormone-induced iatrogenic disease by doctors at our children’s hospitals.

Causing Disease

And here lies my first problem with paediatric gender endocrinologists. They do the exact opposite of all other endocrinologists. The whole point of endocrinology is to treat disease caused by hormone levels being pathologically elevated or depressed. The whole point of endocrinology is to put hormone levels back into the normal range. This is true of every endocrine disease — diabetes, thyroid disease, adrenal insufficiency and so on.

But not when it comes to treating gender-diverse children. When a child enters the clinic of a paediatric gender endocrinologist for their first injection of a puberty blocker, they have zero endocrine disease. That child’s hormone levels are all exactly where they should be. Their gonadotropins are normal, their sex hormones are normal for the stage of puberty. They have no disease.

Yet when they leave, the paediatric gender endocrinologist has induced abnormal hormone levels. In that child, a doctor has deliberately suppressed normal hormone levels to treat, not endocrine disease, but that child’s mental distress.

When that child turns 16, that iatrogenic hormone suppression has continued. The paediatric gender endocrinologist then goes one step further, and deliberately introduces exogenous sex hormones. They deliberately raise a female’s testosterone to levels that can only be described as pathological. They deliberately raise a male’s oestrogen levels too. They continue to suppress that child’s own natural sex hormone levels.

They are inducing iatrogenic disease. On purpose. Not as a side effect, but deliberately.

In what other circumstance would this be considered acceptable? Within endocrinology, can you imagine another similar circumstance? If any endocrinologist was to deliberately elevate or suppress a patient’s thyroxine level outside the normal range, they would be subjected to disciplinary action. But it has been deemed acceptable for paediatric gender endocrinologists to do this with gonadotropins and sex hormones. Why?

In what other speciality would this be considered acceptable? A physically healthy child never enters a paediatric gastroenterologist’s clinic and leaves with gastrointestinal disease that wasn’t there before. Why are physically healthy children seeing specialists who treat disease the child doesn’t have?

Everything paediatric gender endocrinologists do is antithetical to both paediatrics and endocrinology.

The aim of paediatrics is to ensure children reach adulthood as healthy as possible. Paediatric gender endocrinologists take physically healthy children and commit them to a lifetime of medicalisation.


If a child has significantly delayed puberty at the age of 16, a paediatric endocrinologist will help initiate it, because we all recognise that puberty is an essential component of human development that gives us all that we need to be healthy adults. Paediatric gender endocrinologists have decided puberty is now optional for some children, and those essentials aren’t required.

The evidence for this pathway is low. Its aim, to improve mental health outcomes, remains weakly supported. And everyone else knows it. Everyone else is talking about it. The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) appraised the evidence for both puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and found the evidence “very low”. This pathway has been subject to a judicial review. The NHS asked Dr Hilary Cass, past President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, to review the treatment of gender-diverse children. She wrote in her Interim report that

“At this stage the Review is not able to provide advice on the use of hormone treatments due to gaps in the evidence base.”

The Karolinska Institutet, the seat of the Nobel prize for medicine, has recommended immediate cessation of this pathway for all children under the age of 18. Even one of the original Dutch clinicians has expressed concern about the rest of the world adopting this pathway blindly.

The world has started to take notice of the problems this pathway brings and is undertaking a review.

This brings me to the second and most important reason why you should never refer to your local paediatric gender clinic here in Australia. They know all this. They know the implications of this pathway. They know it has problems like infertility. They know the evidence is weak. They know there is scrutiny elsewhere. They know. But they carry on anyway. There is little acknowledgment, except for the clinicians at Westmead, that there is anything to see here. According to most gender clinics in Australia, everything is fine and dandy.

I took part in an online education series in November and December last year, run by my local gender clinic. I was genuinely interested in what they had to say. There have been so many developments over the preceding year or two I was sure they would discuss the difficulties and the controversies.

But there was nothing. Not a single mention of any of the concerns. They told an online audience across the state that everything was fine. It was a demonstration of ideology, not medicine.

No child should be treated in a clinic, run by a tertiary children’s hospital, that places ideology above self-reflection and evidence. No child should be treated in a clinic that doesn’t have the courage in its convictions to come out and publicly acknowledge that they are in fact sterilising children. No child should be treated in a clinic that does not disclose its treatments, its numbers, or any statistics. If you refer a child to my local children’s hospital paediatric gender clinic, what is the likelihood that the child will be given puberty blockers? What is the likelihood they won’t stop them? I asked my local clinic, and they wouldn’t tell me.

Duty of Care

We are in the midst of a medical scandal. This is happening under our noses. We are all somewhat complicit; we have failed to support our colleagues who have raised concerns before, we have blindly assumed that a children’s hospital must be doing the right thing simply because it’s the children’s hospital.

We haven’t asked questions. Or we’ve been too afraid to. It may be that the people doing this are colleagues we work alongside and know are good people and it seems wrong to criticise them. But the only way to bring this to the fore is if, as a profession, we stand up and push for that scrutiny. We need openness from the clinics. We need honesty. We need acknowledgement of the truth.

We need to discuss all of the issues with which I have barely scratched the surface here — the huge explosion of girls presenting, the high rates of autism and trauma, the concern over brain maturation, children being treated on this pathway while in the care of protective services, the influence of social media, the stories of those who detransition long after the paediatric gender services are done with them, and above all, consent. Can a child at the age of 11 or 12, when puberty is just starting, consent to this pathway and all of its outcomes both known and unknown? This is the most important question of all.

It’s likely I will attract criticism about “politicising children”, given the election. But when are we going to have this conversation in Australia? When are we going to confront and acknowledge the reality of what we are doing to children, even if you’re convinced it’s the right path? If not now, when? When a critical number of those children look back on the life they’ve been given and ask why did it happen? It will be too late. It is already too late for some. Right now, in Australia, there are children, teenagers and adults among us who have been committed to this lifetime of medicalisation. I want to make sure there aren’t any more.

Primum non nocere.

Thank the Source

Leaving a Godly Heritage

Leaving a Godly Heritage

How do we form our children in the faith and bestow a Godly heritage upon them? Let us turn to God’s Word for inspiration and instruction.

Sons are a heritage from the Lord
Children are a reward from Him.
~ Psalm 127:3 (NIV)

What does leaving a Godly heritage look like? What does it mean ‘to leave a Godly heritage?’

Heritage can relate to many things, but for our purpose, we will use the Oxford Dictionary definition, which in part states: Heritage is “valued qualities and cultural traditions that have been passed down from previous generations.”

The instructions written by Asaph in the 78th Psalm, especially verses 5-7, encapsulate how ‘heritage’ can be a living experience to perpetuate the teachings of our God and His achievements. It is written:

He decreed statutes for Jacob, and established the law in Israel,
which He commanded our forefathers to teach to their children,
so that the next generation would know them, even the children yet to be born,
and they in turn would tell their children.
Then they would put their trust in God
and not forget His deeds but would keep His commands.’

The Big Question

Is this happening in your home and the homes of the families involved in the church? How do we teach and nurture our heritage? Do we pass on all we know about our Lord to our children and teach and encourage them to teach their children?

The family home is the most crucial and important learning environment for our children. It is here, in their early formative years, where the child will be most influenced — for better or for worse. They will learn (or not) to bond with those around them.

Children learn language, positive and negative behaviour, and how to interact with others in the home. Modern research confirms that the first five years of a child’s life are the most crucial and vital time to instil good attitudes and create healthy habits, especially regarding their spiritual growth and understanding.

Research by the noted developmental psychologist and anthropologist at Oxford University, Justin L Barret, about the value of religious faith, has found that we are all predisposed to believe in God from birth. This would be consistent with the Scripture in Ecclesiastes 3:11 —

He has also set eternity in the hearts of men….”

To further explore what it means to leave a Godly heritage, let us now consider the instructions given to Moses before the Israelites went into the Promised Land. Consider how these instructions relate to us today.

My conviction is that these Scriptures set out God’s plan for families and demonstrate how to impart the parents’ faith to their children. I use the word to impart the parent’s faith, as opposed to imposing their faith on their children. The home is the place where children should be introduced to the Lord of Creation and the Saviour of the World.

Deuteronomy 6:4-9 is known as the Shema (pronounced “Shem-ar”) and is worthy of our examination. These instructions for the family were given to Moses to be passed on. It is considered by devout Jews as the most critical and significant portion of the book of Deuteronomy.

Jewish children are taught this as a prayer. Devout Jews recite it three times a day. Each Friday evening, as the Sabbath begins, in Jewish homes around the world, the father, and sometimes the mother, lay hands on the children’s heads and pray for them.

Deuteronomy 6:4–9  (NIV)

Verse 4

“Hear O Israel: The Lord our God is one.”

‘You shall have no other gods before Me’, states the First Commandment. The land into which the Jews were going was a land with a multitude of gods. Sadly, this is the same as the society our children find themselves in today. We have the answers to help them make the right decisions.

Verse 5

“Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.”

An expert in the law tested Jesus with a question. “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus quoted this Scripture in Matthew 22:37. “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind (might).”

Jesus then went on to say in verses 38-40, “This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” 

Our children are in desperate need of godly role models. This is a great opportunity for parents, teachers, uncles, aunties and grandparents to be those role models who demonstrate that they love the Lord with all their hearts, all their souls and all their minds.

THOUGHT: If I expect my children to pray, then they need to see me praying.

If I expect my children to love the Word of God, they need to see that in me.

If I expect my children to love the Lord their God with all their hearts, with all their souls and with all their minds, guess where they will be looking?

Verse 6

“These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts.”

Notice that this is a commandment, not just any ordinary instruction. Dare I say, not unlike the well-known Ten Commandments!  The Lord tells us these words are to be in our hearts. These are not just for head knowledge, but are to be an outward demonstration and expression of our inner beliefs and convictions.

Verse 7

“Impress them on your children.
Talk about them when you sit at home
and when you walk along the road,
when you lie down and when you get up.”

The word used to “impress” means to engrave. Not merely talking but living it out, which is much harder. We do this to impart our faith, as opposed to imposing our faith on our children. If as parents we use the “do what I say and not what I do” line, it will not work in the long term.

Whom to impress — Our children

What to impress — The Word of God

Where to impress — Walking, lying down, getting up, and sitting down or,
use every appropriate and suitable opportunity.

When to impress — All the time.

This is a “lifestyle” that should be evident in our everyday life.

Verse 8

“Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.”

It is always a joy when you see young people wearing the WWJD (What Would Jesus Do?) bracelets or something similar, and T-shirts that have a Christian message. Not only are these reminders important for our children who are feeling comfortable with a faith that is their own, but we also need to be reminded of the word of God. Hopefully, as they wear these obviously Christian items, they will also become competent in articulating their beliefs.

Verse 9

“Write them on the door frames of your houses and on your gates.”

It is possible to have various reminders, such as Scriptures around the house and other Christian symbols, such as the Nativity scene during the Christmas season. We should endeavour to give our children books, games and items that will strengthen their faith and not cause them to stumble. These practices should begin when the child is very young.

Challenge: To take God’s commandments seriously.

What are the consequences of ignoring God’s instruction for our families?

Let us look at what happened to the Jewish nation when they ignored God’s instructions.

About 120-150 years after entering the Promised Land and experiencing God’s grace, we read these words.

Judges 2:8-11

Verse 8

“Joshua son of Nun died, the servant of the Lord died at the age of one hundred and ten.”

Verse 9

“And they buried him in the land of his inheritance,
at Timnath Heres in the hill country of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash.”

The influence of the godly men and women has now passed away.

Verse 10

After that whole generation had been gathered to their fathers,
another generation grew up, who knew neither the Lord
nor what He had done for Israel

After all the wonderful blessings of God, a WHOLE generation grew up who not only did not know the Lord but did not know the awesome things God had done for Israel!

Verse 11

Then the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord and served the Baal.

Many of this generation do not know the Lord nor the incredible things He has done in the development of our great nation, Australia, or for that matter, Western civilisation.

That generation did not understand or did not know how to live in a Godly manner. They pursued a destructive and flawed lifestyle with dire consequences. Knowledge of a Godly heritage was not successfully taught or adopted.

Tragically, both of these situations happen too often in Australia and the Western world today.

What heritage will you offer your children to receive and adopt as a lifestyle?

THOUGHT: How seriously do we take God’s instructions about teaching our children?

Suggested reading

  • George Barna, “Transforming Children into Spiritual Champions”
  • Ted Baehr and Pat Boone, “The Culture-Wise Family”
  • Mark Griffiths, “One Generation from Extinction”


Photo by Vlada Karpovich.

Thank the Source

The Massacre of the Innocents

The FDA and CDC launch a reckless nationwide medical experiment on children

I. The government is coming for your kids

Last week was shrouded in darkness. We saw the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) and the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) assemble the pieces of their Final Solution.

The meetings were surreal as so-called “experts” displayed no critical thinking skills and instead wallowed in clichés supplied to them by the pharmaceutical industry.

Over the course of five meetings in five days we witnessed crimes against humanity, the end of the bourgeoisie, and the likely end of America.

Let’s talk about what actually happened at the meetings, the short and long-term implications of the decisions that were made, and where we go from here.

II. The meetings themselves

The clinical trials of Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots in kids all had the same flaws — enabled and encouraged by the permissive FDA. Moderna and Pfizer each:

1. Failed to demonstrate actual health benefits (so they relied on junk science “immunobridging” even though there are no valid correlates of protection);
2. Wiped out the control group, so there is no long term safety data; and
3. Caused catastrophic adverse events.

Contrary to their statutory obligations, the FDA/VRBPAC and CDC/ACIP do not act as regulators. Instead they see themselves as partners with Pharma. Indeed FDA and CDC officials often slip and say “we” when referring to the applicant — it’s all one big happy crime family.

At the meetings, the FDA and CDC went to great lengths to exaggerate the risks of Covid in children. As you know, there is no Covid-19 emergency in kids But Emergency Use Authorization requires a public health emergency so the FDA and CDC manufacture one.

Many presentations at the meetings last week cited the same British pre-print study that claims that Covid-19 was the 4th or 5th leading cause of death in children in the U.S. This is false.

Kelley Krohnert from Covid Georgia dismantles the pre-print.

The British academics who wrote the paper make two obvious errors. First they count deaths “with Covid” (tested after they got to the hospital for some other reason or underlying condition) as “from Covid.” If you remove the “with Covid” from the tally, the numbers shrink by about 35%.

The second major error in the pre-print is that the authors “compare the cumulative number of Covid deaths over 26 months to deaths from other causes over a one year period.” Whoops. So the FDA and CDC made their case by double-counting Covid-19 deaths in children.

Once these errors are corrected, Covid-19 drops down to the 8th or 9th leading cause of death. But as Ms. Krohnert explains:

Even given the corrected rankings above, there are also issues with the entire concept of showing the impact of Covid deaths in children using rankings. Rankings overstate the impact of Covid, because the top few causes of death far outweigh the causes further down the list. For example, in ages 1-4, accidents account for almost 25 times as many deaths as Covid-19 on an annualized basis. Furthermore, for each of the 4 age groups covered by the CDC slide, the very broad “accidents” is the leading cause of death. If we break that down further, causes of death like drownings, vehicle crashes, drug overdoses, would be individual causes of death greater than Covid in various age groups.

For those who want to argue, “if-it-even-prevents-one-death(TM)”: Covid-19 is NOT a vaccine-preventable-disease given that these shots do not stop infection, transmission, hospitalization, nor death. And given adverse events, Covid-19 shots will cause a net increase in deaths not a decrease.

If one really cares about the health of children, mandate fences around swimming pools, not experimental gene-modifying injections for the entire childhood population.

Ms. Krohnert contacted the authors of the paper to alert them to these errors and now they are revising the paper (a new draft is due next week). Of course, the FDA and CDC never admit that they were wrong because they don’t actually care about data.

At these meetings it is standard practice for FDA and CDC to lie about the benefits of these shots. Indeed the FDA went to great lengths to downplay the risk of vaccine-induced myocarditis in the briefing documents for Moderna and Pfizer. In preparing these documents the FDA relies on fixers — Matt Oster, Tom Shimabukuro, and John Su at CDC and Nicola Klein at Kaiser Permanente — to manipulate the data to fit the Pharma narrative.

However, one of the unusual things about the VRBPAC meeting on Tuesday is that Ruth Link-Gelles from CDC just straight up admitted that these shots have negative efficacy.

Then Tom Shimabukuro (citing his own slides and those from John Su and Nicola Klein) just straight up admitted that these shots cause myocarditis:

So I’m watching at home thinking… ‘no observed health benefits (that’s why they had to switch to immunobriding) and they are admitting that the shots have negative efficacy and cause myocarditis, therefore the risks outweigh the benefits. So how are they going to try to get out of this?’

And their argument is (supplied by Jacqueline Miller, Senior VP at Moderna) that the risk of myocarditis from Covid is greater than the risk of myocarditis from these shots. One of the obvious problems with that argument is that THESE SHOTS DO NOT PREVENT COVID. So the FDA is accepting a known risk from these shots in return for an imagined benefit that does not exist in the real world.

The VRBPAC and ACIP do not care about the facts at all. As George Lakoff famously observed, “facts bounce off of frames” and the frame that guides these public health zombies is, “vaccines are infallible.”

Adverse events. Others have done a better job of flagging adverse events in these clinical trials. Quant genius Jessica Rose wrote an excellent article about the harms in the Pfizer clinical trial and the Moderna clinical trial.

Look at pages 169 to 171 of the FDA briefing document for Moderna that showed 18 serious adverse events in the vaccine group as compared with only 1 in the placebo group in kids 6 through 23 months of age.

Furthermore, no one at the FDA/VRBPAC nor CDC/ACIP can explain why VAERS reports skyrocketed following the introduction of Covid-19 shots at the end of 2020 and why reports of vaccine injury in kids skyrocketed following the authorization of the Pfizer mRNA shot in kids last fall. Indeed FDA honcho Peter Marks had a meltdown at the end of the VRBPAC meeting on Wednesday because VAERS was trending on Twitter (apparently the public was not impressed with the VRBPAC’s self-serving nonsense).

Further observations:

At these meetings there is no critical thinking, no hard questions, and no debate.

There’s no science at all at these meetings, just a theatrical performance of science-y sounding things.

Quite literally, these so-called experts apologized to Moderna for asking them questions.

No one asks about adverse events.

There’s no discussion of antibody dependent enhancement, prion disease, or any of the other nightmare possibilities that seem to be emerging.

No VRBPAC member ever uses the phrase “negative efficacy” — even though the Pfizer application in kids showed negative efficacy between dose 1 and dose 2 and negative efficacy against the Omicron variant.

Antibodies are accepted as a valid measure even though everyone knows that there are no correlates of protection.

No one questioned the fact that FDA and CDC spent a year minimizing the risks of myocarditis and still could not get the safety signal to go away entirely.

No one questioned the fact that the international scientific consensus is that mRNA shots cause myocarditis in young people and that the U.S. is the only country in the world to push these shots on little kids.

The VRBPAC and ACIP members live in an alternative universe where sacrificing children is always acceptable to serve “The Greater Good(TM).”

VRBPAC and ACIP meetings are a horror movie come to life.

While these shots showed no benefit and catastrophic harms… the VRBPAC members wanted MORE, MORE, MORE!

Paul Offit led the charge on Tuesday by arguing that Moderna’s toxic shot should be a THREE dose series instead of the two doses that Moderna was applying for. Because VRBPAC members are selected for ideological conformity and groupthink, several other members piled on and echoed Offit’s call for MORE Moderna doses in kids.

On Wednesday, Offit again led the charge by arguing that Pfizer was “underdosed” (his word) at 3 mcg of mRNA in little kids and that they should have put MORE mRNA in there to produce a larger antibody response — adverse events in children be damned.

At this point, the bloodlust of these committees is unquenchable.

In the end, there was no need to even hold the meetings because the decisions were already made before they started.

On Tuesday, VRBPAC voted 21 to 1 to authorize the Moderna EUA application to inject mRNA into kids 6 to 17 years old. (There was 1 abstention — from the new guy, Bruce Gellin.)

On Wednesday, VRBPAC voted 21 to 0 to authorize the EUA applications to inject Moderna into kids 6 months to 5 years old and Pfizer into little kids 6 months to 4 years old.

On Saturday the CDC let it slip that Covid-19 shots in kids will be 10-dose vials. 10-dose vials are terrible because administration errors go up and because it’s impossible to guarantee consistency across doses (unless perfectly shaken before each dose, the ingredients may not be evenly distributed across the 10 doses). The federal government has paid billions of dollars to these companies up front for these shots. The fact that they did not require single dose vials shows that they do not know what they are doing and they have absolutely no concern for your health.

At the end of the meeting Saturday ACIP voted 12 to 0 to authorize the applications to inject Moderna and Pfizer into little kids.

Rochelle Walensky signed off on the Final Solution on Saturday night.

The federal government’s massacre of the innocents began Monday June 20, 2022.

III. The short and long-term implications of these decisions

The VRBPAC and ACIP believe that they achieved some sort of great victory. They got nostalgic at the end of the meeting as they looked back over the Final Solution that they had constructed over the last year. One can imagine Reinhard Heydrich and the other participants in the Wannsee Conference in 1942 felt the same way.

The reality is quite different. The FDA and CDC have guaranteed their own collapse.

Here’s how the next few years are likely to play out:

About one-third to half of the Democratic Party (including the overwhelming majority of the public health establishment) are afflicted with hypochondria, Stockholm Syndrome, and/or Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. They are going to take their kids to be injected right away at any nearby CVS, Walgreens, or out of the back of a windowless van down by the river. They don’t care — “needles into arms (and legs)” is the only thing that Democrats believe in now. They’re junkies who get high from deadly virtue signaling.

Those poor kids are going to develop a wide range of adverse events — myocarditis, heart attacks, strokes, autoimmune disorders, cancer, endocrine disorders, infertility, and sudden “unexplained” death, to name a few. The over-boosted adults will suffer a similar fate. The bourgeoisie will lose their health, their dignity, and then all of their wealth to the Pharma cartel.

Over time, about half of injured families will come over to our side and become single issue medical freedom voters. That will give us the numbers we need to take power and prosecute the evil doers. All of the demographic advantages that Democrats thought would carry them to permanent majorities will evaporate.

Republicans, who understand vaccine injury better than Democrats at this point, will win the November midterm elections, the 2024 Presidential election, and the majority of local, state, and federal elections for the foreseeable future. Republicans will control all of the appropriations committees and oversight committees that have purview over HHS, FDA, CDC, and NIH. Fauci, Walensky, Califf, and Marks will all quickly retire to avoid being called to testify.

The meritocratic bourgeoisie system that has guided the U.S. for two centuries has already collapsed. It turns out that meritocracy was always a lie. Many of the most esteemed bourgeois institutions in the country were represented at the meetings last week — Stanford, Harvard, NEJM, and the Rockefeller Foundation — and they have no credibility now. When the fate of our nation was on the line they revealed themselves to be fascist clowns whose ideology renders them less smart than the average homeschooled fifth grader. The trust that was the lifeblood of our system is no more.

By failing to listen to the majority of the country that is deeply skeptical of these shots, the FDA and CDC deepened the polarization and made reconciliation nearly impossible.

These decisions will make no difference on the pandemic. If anything these authorizations of more shots for kids mean that the pandemic will continue for years — because the shots do not work and they fuel the evolution of variants that evade vaccines.

One might think that these decisions will lead to civil war or partition of the country into separate independent red and blue countries. At this point there is no need for red states like Texas and Florida to split off to form their own countries because Republicans are about to control EVERYTHING — Congress, the Presidency, and the Courts.

IV. Where do we go from here?

We’re all traumatized right now but we need to keep our head in the game. We need to become the leaders who will take over as things begin to fall apart.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices is still going to vote on Thursday June 23, on Moderna’s EUA application to inject mRNA into kids 6 to 17. You can still register a formal comment — look for the blue comment button in the upper left hand corner or upload your own file.

Then, eight days from now the FDA is going to vote on the “Future Framework”. It’s a proposal to exempt Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers from clinical trials for reformulated shots. It’s literally the worst idea in the history of public health.

Long term we need to shift our strategy from lobbying others to taking power ourselves. Right now it seems the Republican Party is the best vehicle for accomplishing this goal. But honestly at this point, how many national Republican leaders (10? 20?) actually understand the enormity of the catastrophe that has been inflicted upon us over these past two years?

We need to make the point every chance that we get that the November midterm election is not about inflation, guns, abortion, drag shows, nor Ukraine. The 2022 midterm election is about stopping the Pharma genocide. Vote for politicians who publicly speak out against all of the following ongoing atrocities:

• Tony Fauci funded the creation of a gain-of-function virus that got loose and killed 6 million+ people.

• The medical establishment blocks access to safe and effective treatments in order to create the market for vaccines.

• Hospitals used and continue to use the wrong protocols because all of their financial incentives are not aligned with health.

• Poorly tested genetic experiments were injected into BILLIONS of people worldwide causing an increase in all-cause mortality and a wide range of horrific adverse events that are going to wreck human health and the economy for DECADES.

• Social media companies censor life saving information to protect the cartel while enriching themselves; the entire mainstream media is complicit in covering up the genocide.

• Schools and universities are incapable of conducting even basic risk benefit assessments and instead sacrifice the students in their care to the predatory pharmaceutical industry.

• The FDA and CDC sold the American people to the pharmaceutical industry.

THAT’S what needs to be addressed, unraveled, and prosecuted. Everything else is secondary.


Lord Shaftesbury: Protecting the Children

Lord Shaftesbury: Protecting the Children

The Industrial Revolution changed how people lived and worked. Instead of being outdoors on farms, the impoverished children of coal miners were roped into dangerous underground work. Inspired by his Christian faith and values, the British parliamentary member Lord Shaftesbury stood up for the rights of these children, campaigning for laws to protect them from harm.

Think about a newborn baby. When we look at tiny babies, we are immediately struck by their complete and utter helplessness. They depend entirely on adults to give them what they need. And not just babies: children, too, are some of the most vulnerable of all human beings and are totally dependent on the adults around them for their physical, emotional and spiritual wellbeing.

Sadly, not all children have been cared for in this way. And that’s why historical figures like Lord Shaftesbury have needed, at times, to step in and protect children in need.

Terrible Danger

In 1838, there was a terrible accident at the Huskar Colliery (coal mine) in Britain in which, tragically, 26 children died: 15 boys from 7 to 16 years of age, and 11 girls from 8 to 17 years of age. Partly due to this shocking event, the public became increasingly concerned about the use of child labour in coal mines.

Queen Victoria, the British Queen at the time, took a personal interest in the disaster, and other powerful people also called for change.

Until the mid-nineteenth century, it was accepted in Britain that children as young as five years old could be part of the industrial workforce. Change was needed. Between 1840 and 1842, government inspectors visited the Welsh coalfields and spoke to many child miners. These interviews were presented to Parliament as part of The Commission of Enquiry into the State of Children in Employment. This Enquiry revealed the horrific conditions that children worked in.

To the Rescue

Lord Ashley Shaftesbury

Lord Shaftesbury: Anthony Ashley Cooper, “the poor man’s earl”

Lord Shaftesbury, a British Member of Parliament, had been campaigning since 1828 for something to be done about the terrible conditions and injustices that many people were forced to live under at this time.

One of his main concerns was to introduce laws that prohibited the employment of women and children in coal mines. He also wanted the government to provide care for people with mental illness, establish a maximum ten-hour work day for factory workers, and outlaw employing young boys as chimney sweeps.

Coal mines in this period were cramped, poorly ventilated and highly dangerous. There was little attention paid to health and safety. Children were often injured or killed by explosions, by mine roofs falling in, or by being run over by carts.

But what were such little children doing working in mines in the first place?

Beneath the Earth

Children performed a number of important tasks underground. They could be doorkeepers, who operated the ventilation doors to let coal carts through; drammers, who pulled coal carts to and from the coal face; colliers’ helpers, who assisted with the actual coal cutting, usually alongside their fathers or older brothers; or drivers, who led the horses that pulled wagons full of coal along the main roadways underground.

children in minesPhilip Philips, aged 10, from Brace Colliery in Llanelli, was accustomed to the dangers of ladders:

‘I help my brother to cart. I can go down the ladders by myself.
I am not afraid to go down the pit.’

The Government Inspector who interviewed Philip during the Enquiry climbed down these ladders himself — but with difficulty. Unlike Philip, he was afraid of the noise and the heavy pumping rods that were very close to the ladders.

Mary Davis was a ‘pretty little girl’ of 6 years old. The Government Inspector found her fast asleep against a large stone underground in the Plymouth Mines at Merthyr. When she woke up, she said:

‘I went to sleep because my lamp had gone out for want of oil. I was frightened, for someone had stolen my bread and cheese. I think it was the rats.’

child trapperSusan Reece, also 6 years of age and a doorkeeper in the same colliery, said:

‘I have been below six or eight months and I don’t like it much. I come here at six in the morning and leave at six at night. When my lamp goes out, or I am hungry, I run home. I haven’t been hurt yet.’


A coal mine was a dangerous place even for adults, so it’s no surprise that many children were badly injured underground. Here are some more quotes from children who worked in the mines at this time:

“Nearly a year ago there was an accident and most of us were burned. I was carried home by a man. It hurt very much because the skin was burnt off my face. I couldn’t work for six months.”
Phillip Phillips, aged 10, Plymouth Mines, Merthyr.

“I got my head crushed a short time since by a piece of roof falling.”
William Skidmore, aged 8, Buttery Hatch Colliery, Mynydd Islwyn.

“… got my legs crushed some time since, which threw me off work some weeks.”
John Reece, aged 14, Hengoed Colliery.

Some children spent up to twelve hours on their own, underground, all alone in the dark. They had little time for school, and even when they could go to school, they were too tired to learn. They were often pale, undernourished and dressed in ragged clothing.

Compelled to Speak

Shaftesbury wanted to do something about this terrible neglect. He had argued in Parliament for some time that new laws were needed to protect children. What was it that prompted Lord Shaftesbury to act on behalf of vulnerable people like this?children in coalmines

He had felt that God was prompting him “to devote whatever advantages he might have bestowed… in the cause of the weak, the helpless, both man and beast, and those who had none to help them.” The Bible teaches Christian believers to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves — and it was this understanding of Jesus’ teachings that led him to take a strong stand against the mistreatment of children, and speak out on their behalf to protect and care for them.

Eventually, these three laws were passed:

  • The 1841 Mines Act: No child under the age of 10 to work underground in a coal mine.
  • The 1847 Ten Hour Act: No child to work more than 10 hours in a day.
  • The 1874 Factory Act: No child under 10 to be employed in a factory.

In 1842, children under the age of 10 (and women) were no longer allowed to work underground. In 1860 the age limit for boy miners was raised to 12, and in 1900 it was raised to 13.

These were improvements at the time, but the continued use of child labour is considered unthinkable in today’s Western society.

Christian Values

In the world Jesus was born into, children, along with women, old men and slaves, were viewed as physically weak burdens on society who had little value in the community. In ancient Greece and Rome, many people even found it acceptable to abandon unwanted children along the roadsides and leave them to die.

But Jesus taught that children were not to be looked down upon, but to be loved and valued.

When Christianity became more active during the ancient Roman era (when Rome ruled most of the known world), the teachings of Jesus became more public and widespread. Jesus’ teachings about children were faithfully followed by the early church. The Christians taught that God cared for children, slaves and women, just as much as He did for men. Some Christians began collecting infants abandoned by their parents and raising them as their own. From the Christian point of view in this ancient time, both children and adults were equal in the kingdom of God.

It is this attitude to children that has driven faithful Christian believers like Lord Shaftesbury — and many others in history — to try to improve the lives of children in need.

These days, we have seen organisations like the United Nations start the Universal Children’s Day. Australia’s own Children’s Week Council of Australia holds the National Children’s Week each year in October to help draw attention to the needs of children and to value them.

And while there are still many places in the world where children’s needs are sadly not met, it is great to be reminded of the work of caring and faithful people like Lord Shaftesbury who, prompted by his belief in the teachings of Jesus, fought to remind adults of their role in nurturing children and providing them with every opportunity to reach their full potential.


Originally published at Did You Know? Education. Photo: Snopes

Thank the Source

Dads4Kids Celebrating 20 Years Helping Our Children Thrive

Dads4Kids Celebrating 20 Years Helping Our Children Thrive

Dads4Kids has been on a mission to turn the toxic tide of fatherlessness throughout Australia and even the world. With your help, we can continue building up better fathers, who will lay the foundations for their families to flourish throughout their lives.

I have warm memories of my Dad telling my brother and me stories, each night before we went to sleep. Stories of adventures in faraway lands, strange encounters with tigers and black panthers in the wild jungle.

True life snake stories (my favourite) and stories about stockmen and horses in the Australian outback. These stories were always riveting and greatly encouraging.

Looking back, I realise that the reason they were ‘warm’ and ‘greatly encouraging’ was because it was a real live Dad, who loved his children and who was giving his children his undivided attention through telling stories.

It left a long, warm glow on the inside of me, and the comfort to go to sleep and dream the beautiful dreams that every child deserves to dream.


Sadly, within a few years, my Mum and Dad went their separate ways for a time. I found out later that my Dad was heartbroken as a single father without access to ‘his boys’. We didn’t know it at the time, but we were heartbroken too.

Daddy Doesn't Live Here bookI didn’t realise how heartbroken I was until my early thirties when I randomly picked up a children’s book on a sale table in a shopping centre. My children were young and as a young dad, I was always looking for books to read to the children at night before sleep.

The book, Daddy Doesn’t Live Here Anymore, caught my attention in the most unexpected way. Tears welled up in my eyes as I looked at the pages. I knew the story well and the broken heart that went with the story.

Crucial Foundation

Last Thursday at the Dads4Kids Breakthrough Webinar, a single mother, Sarah Shannon, was asked, “Why are you such a strong supporter and regular donor to Dads4Kids?” My heart skipped a beat when she replied.

“I lost my Dad at the age of eleven. When he passed away my whole world went upside down. I know the importance of having a dad around. He was our solid rock. He was the love of my life. I looked up to him. He taught us many things. When he passed away heaven had gone and hell had come into my life, so I know the importance of having a loving, supportive Dad. The mission of Dads4Kids (to give our children the best start in life) is something I am 200% in support of.”

Our stories are not dissimilar. The pain of fatherlessness is expressed in many different ways. That’s why fatherless children are more likely to end up on drugs, to self-harm, be more prone to suicide, more likely be sexually abused, more likely to drop out of school, more likely to get involved in crime and end up in prison, and the list goes on.

The good news is that when we turn the tide of fatherlessness, our children get the best start in life. Children of involved fathers have a higher IQ, do better at school, enjoy better health, have better relational outcomes, have superior problem-solving skills, have higher levels of economic and career success, and all this is just the beginning.

On a Mission

Over the last 20 years, Dads4Kids has worked hard to turn the tide of fatherlessness in Australia. In 1998, our dear friend Pastor Ron Williams, Indigenous Elder and Leader, declared:

‘The greatest need in Australia is the restoration of fatherhood.’

This led Alison and me, with the support of our wonderful board, to found Dads4Kids in 2002.

Since then, over 21 million people have viewed our message of excellence in fathering found in the Dads4Kids Community Service Announcements as seen on television, inspiring men to be better fathers.

Over the last 20 years, Dads4Kids has equipped, encouraged and inspired millions of fathers through the web, social media and mainstream media. Through our new Dads4Kids Inside-Out Fathering Program, we will support Indigenous and other incarcerated dads within the Australian prison system.

The Dads4Kids weekly email newsletter, inspiring fathers and encouraging families, has been sent out over 3 million times since 2002. Beginning in 2004, the Dads4Kids 10-Week Good to Great Fathering Program has trained over 420 men in excellence in fathering.

In 2007, Dads4Kids helped pioneer a National Men’s Health Policy in the federal government. Through our efforts, the lives of over 3,000 men have been saved. With your help, Dads4Kids has campaigned, and will continue to campaign, against child sexual abuse and to protect women and children from sexual exploitation.

Global Reach

Dads4Kids is the main global supporter for International Men’s Day on November 19 every year. Worldwide, we have campaigned strongly for improvement in men’s health and a reduction in the global male suicide epidemic. Dads4Kids has helped save tens of thousands of men’s lives worldwide over the past 14 years. With your help, we will save the lives of hundreds of thousands more men in the years to come.

Through Dads4Kids Courageous Online Fathering Courses, Dads4Kids Fatherhood Success Seminars, and the annual Dads4Kids Men’s Leadership Summit, we have helped thousands to become better dads, and trained hundreds of dads in how to train others.

In short, the Dads4Kids mission can be spelled out in three words: “Help people love.” Love is the Greatest Force in the Universe.

We could not do all these things without you, our amazing Dads4Kids supporters, subscribers, volunteers and donors. We look forward to 20 more years of transforming Australia, and the world, by inspiring fathers to help their children be the best they can be. Together, we can make a difference.


We announced at the Dads4Kids Breakthrough Webinar that strategic supporters of Dads4Kids have put up an amazing $87,000 matching challenge!

Your one-time gift, or the annualized amount of your monthly pledge to Dads4Kids, given before the 30 June, will be instantly doubled. The really good news is that this is a great way to reduce your tax!

Every donation is tax-deductible!


Yours for Our Children,
Warwick Marsh

PS: Last Thursday’s Dads4Kids Breakthrough Webinar was very real, raw and yet deeply moving. If you have not yet seen it, check it out here.


First published at Dads4Kids. Photo by Pavel Danilyuk.

Thank the Source

‘Fatherhood’: Touching, Hilarious Film About a Single Dad

Two Kisses for Maddy fatherhood book“Fatherhood” is a heartwarming and humorous film about a single dad doing his best to be a good parent to his daughter. Between the laughs, there are nuggets of wisdom about the parenting journey and the irreplaceable love and care of a father.

Recently on a flight — my first flight with my baby son — I was able to catch the 2021 comedy-drama Fatherhood, starring the irrepressible Kevin Hart of Jumanji fame. The film centres on single dad Matt Logelin, left alone with his baby daughter Maddy after Matt’s wife Liz unexpectedly dies following childbirth. It is based on a true story by the real Matt Logelin, published under the title Two Kisses for Maddy: A Memoir of Loss and Love.

Matt’s mother-in-law Marion hovers around after Liz’s funeral, not trusting that Matt can actually look after her granddaughter. “What would I look like goin’ home before I know that you are capable of taking care of my newborn grandchild?” she asks.

Exasperated, Matt retorts: “How are you ever gonna know if you don’t let me do it?”

Community is Key

The story unfolds with Matt succeeding against all odds at being a single dad as well as the sole breadwinner. His buddies rally around to support him, despite their own lack of childrearing experience, and provide the friendship (and levity) that he needs to get through as he tackles cot-building, nappy-changing, and baby-soothing.

Unable to get the baby to sleep, Matt barges in on a parents’ group full of mothers and begs for advice. Armed with new pearls of wisdom (white noise!), Matt finally manages a good night’s sleep with the aid of the vacuum cleaner. He brings the baby to work, and along comes the vacuum too…

A work presentation turns topsy-turvy when the baby started wailing in the distance, but the clients, who happen to be parents as well, all chime in with their parenting tips. His boss Howard contemplates firing him: “This is a place of business, right? It’s not a place of babies.” Thankfully, Matt manages to keep his job and impress the clients.

Dads are Vital

In a vulnerable moment, Matt sighs, “You know Maddy, if you could have only one parent, I wish you could’ve had your mom.” Indeed, childrearing often comes more easily to mothers, and fathers can feel like a spare tyre at times, particularly during the early years — especially if the child is mainly breastfed.

However, research shows that the more hands-on a father is during his child’s infancy, the higher the child’s IQ and eventual chance of success in life.

Lacking a dad of his own, Matt turns to his father-in-law, Mike, for parenting advice. “Welcome to not knowing the right thing to do. That’s a dad speciality,” quips Mike. He is a friendly mentor for Mike, encouraging him through the tough times.


Marion turns up uninvited for the baby’s first medical appointment, which the child thankfully passes with flying colours. “Matthew, today was a good day for you as a parent. You keep all these little victories like you had today in a little box inside you. They’ll be your most prized possessions,” she tells him.

The movie depicts how Matt and Maddy develop as a father and a daughter, through her first years in school, navigating dress codes and dealing with bullies. They also have to adjust to new dynamics when Matt’s colleague introduces him to a lady to whom he takes a fancy.

Parenting is a challenging journey. At the same time, it is very rewarding and full of fun. Fatherhood portrays this wonderful mix of emotions and the personal growth of the main characters, with the single dad learning how to tend to his daughter’s needs and realising that, although his parents-in-law may be able to provide a good home for his daughter, they can’t quite replace him.

The film is full of poignant moments and well-timed hilarity. Available on Netflix, it makes for a good show for parents to laugh over together. Unfortunately, with several instances of swearing and some politically correct plot points (Maddy’s Catholic school is portrayed as archaic for insisting that all girls dress in the appropriate attire, and Matt makes some passing comments supporting transgender ideology), it is probably not advisable for younger children to watch.


First published at Dads4Kids.

Thank the Source

BOMBSHELL: Dr. Clare Craig Exposes How Pfizer Twisted Their Clinical Trial Data for Young Children

BOMBSHELL: Dr. Clare Craig Exposes How Pfizer Twisted Their Clinical Trial Data for Young Children

Must watch!

Source: https://rumble.com/v18s66i-bombshell-dr.-clare-craig-exposes-how-pfizer-twisted-their-clinical-trial-d.html



Please help truthPeep spread the word :)