WHO Proposals Threaten Doctor-Patient Relationship, Personal Autonomy

By Michael Nevradakis Ph.D./Children’s Health Defense

This is part two of a two-part series on how the World Health Organization’s proposed pandemic treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations could strip nations and people of their health decision-making sovereignty. Read part one here.

As the World Health Organization (WHO) prepares to convene its annual World Health Assembly May 21-30, controversy continues to swirl over two proposed instruments on the agenda: the pandemic treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).

Much of the criticism levied against both instruments pertains to how they may threaten national sovereignty.

But experts told The Defender the proposals also threaten personal medical sovereignty, including the doctor-patient relationship, medical freedom and personal autonomy.

“These instruments would inject themselves and interrupt the doctor-patient relationship,” said attorney Reggie Littlejohn. “The WHO will be saying what treatments are the ‘correct’ ones and what treatments are the ‘incorrect’ ones, and that … is an abrogation of sovereignty.”

Littlejohn, who is co-founder of the Sovereignty Coalition, founder and president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers and co-chair of the Stop Vaccine Passports Task Force, told The Defender, “An unelected bunch of foreign bureaucrats should not be telling the U.S. or any other country how to handle our health issues.”