[ad_1]
The ministries responsible for the Covid-19 emergency and schools will have to prepare a “synthetic report” for the Lazio TAR in which the scientific evidence underlying the imposition of the use of the mask for children between 6 and 11 years old is also clarified. , even during school hours.
This is established by order of the judges in an appeal filed by a parent who denounced “phenomena of lack of oxygenation due to prolonged use of the surgical mask during school hours by the minor.”
The TAR considered, among other things: that the appellant, “regarding the factual circumstance of the decrease in oxygenation values during school hours detected by the minor on Saturday, November 14, 2020, provided at least one principle of proof that it seems really difficult to acquire insofar as the measurement with the ‘oximeter’ is left to the autonomous initiative of the minor during school hours, without any help or support from an adult “; that from the contested Dpcm” No in-depth studies have been carried out on the incidence of the use of masks in students aged 6 to 11 on their psychophysical health, nor an analysis of the socio-educational context in which the obligation for these pupils is established as almost absolute, nor about the possibility of a drop in oxygenation in very young pulmonary systems caused by prolonged use of the mask.
Furthermore, it does not appear that it has regulated the imposition of the use of masks on minors “subordinating it to the adoption by schools of specific practical operational guidelines for individual classes, giving precise indications on the monitoring of the individual’s oxygenation level after on prolonged use of the mask, on the immediate help to be provided to schoolchildren showing signs of fatigue, on how to assess “the child’s compliance with the use of the mask and its impact on learning skills”, elements such as “suggesting that the administration has achieved an adequate balance between the fundamental right to health of the community and all other inviolable rights, including mainly the right to health of minors between 6 and 11 years of age, do not emerge, in order to characterize the imposition on the latter of the use of an effective provision of individual protection in a prolonged and unconditional way, including on the counter and with adequate space. “
Although “not having to degrade the interest in the health of a minor simply because the contested Dpcm will cease to have effect on December 3, 2020”, the TAR has decided to postpone the investigation of the issues raised with the appeal to the hearing of on the next 10 of February; meanwhile, it asked the Administration that within a month, “a copy of the minutes no. 122 and 123 of the sessions of October 31 and November 3, 2020 and no. 124 of the session of November 8, 2020, of the Technical-Scientific Committee as well as a brief report in which the scientific evidence is clarified, based on the imposition of the use of the mask also for children between 6 and 11 years old, even during school hours, based on specific research on the ‘local epidemiological situation’ of each region, on the ‘sociocultural context’ in which the children live, from which the danger of a drop in oxygenation can be considered avoided due to very young pulmonary systems, caused by prolonged use of the mask, or the repercussions of this imposition on the psychophysical health of minors in a particularly delicate phase of growth ”.
[ad_2]
