Children Under Threat in Hungary: Drs. Papp and Mihalik (Part 2)

In part two of this interview with Dr. Éva Papp and Dr. Angelika Mihalik, we explore how a compulsory vaccination system is enforced through overlapping medical, legal, and administrative mechanisms that limit individualized clinical judgment and parental consent. These accounts describe how documented injuries are dismissed, how legal remedies fail to produce lasting outcomes, and how state involvement begins early in family life.Help support the legal defense of families in Hungary who are being fined and pressured by the government for choosing not to vaccinate their already vaccine-injured children, often facing repeated penalties for each missed vaccination. Your support makes a real difference in protecting these families, and your contributions go directly toward their defense.Support Their CauseDr. Éva Papp is an accomplished Hungarian scientist, researcher and public health advocate. In response to the irregularities and harms of the Covid era, Dr Papp has dedicated herself to a mission for truth and medical freedom in Hungary.Dr. Angelika Mihalik is a Hungarian lawyer specializing in medical and constitutional law, representing families seeking vaccine exemptions and challenging compulsory vaccination practices.Dr. Éva Papp explained that many exemption requests are made only after children develop serious, ongoing health conditions requiring specialist care. Case files often contain hospital discharge summaries, specialist evaluations, and long-term medical records documenting clear health deterioration following earlier injections. In some cases, treating physicians explicitly advise against further vaccination due to identifiable medical risks, including possible mortality.Despite this, once these records enter the administrative system, they are ignored. Dr. Mihalik described how this process formally removes decision-making authority from the child’s own doctor once an exemption request enters administrative review. At that stage, the treating physician no longer has a say, even though they possess better knowledge of the child’s medical history and are providing more direct medical judgment.Both doctors emphasized that administrative enforcement does not operate in isolation from child protection systems. Dr. Papp described how parental resistance to vaccination can be documented in official records and later used as evidence of “neglect” or “risk” to the child. These records may trigger involvement from child protection authorities, even when no evidence of harm or inadequate care exists.Dr. Papp confirmed that this dynamic dramatically raises the stakes for families. What begins as a medical disagreement can escalate into threats of custody intervention, placing parents under pressure to comply regardless of medical risk. This convergence of health administration and child protection transforms vaccination enforcement into a coercive process with consequences extending far beyond fines or administrative penalties.Dr. Mihalik explained that court proceedings function primarily as temporary delays rather than paths to resolution. Legal filings may pause enforcement actions, but each delay is time-limited and conditional. Families often manage multiple overlapping cases for a single child, each tied to a different stage of enforcement.Even when courts rule in favor of parents, those decisions rarely bring closure. Authorities frequently resume enforcement, ignoring the law, which forces families back into litigation.Dr. Mihalik reported that recent legal changes further limit the ability to hold individual doctors legally accountable within the compulsory vaccination system. She also confirmed that Hungary has no functional compensation system for vaccine-related injury.When a child is injured, families receive no medical or financial support. Furthermore, under Hungarian law, compensation for vaccine injury is owed only to the injured individual—not to the parents or family. Dr. Mihalik explained that if a child dies, the legal claim for compensation automatically terminates because the person (the child) who would receive the money no longer exists in a legal sense. What emerges from the accounts of Dr. Éva Papp and Dr. Angelika Mihalik is a system in which parental judgment is treated as a problem to be managed. Parents who question or refuse injections are drawn into administrative and legal processes designed to enforce adherence rather than evaluate individual risk. This authoritarian approach to medicine must not be allowed to continue. Healing After Harm Fundraiser CampaignWe need your support to launch our cutting-edge, evidence-based supplement line designed specifically to aid recovery, detoxification, and long-term prosperity for those affected by Covid-19 “vaccines”. These premium formulations draw on the latest independent research to empower healing, restore vitality, and build resilience for a healthier future.Help Us Get It On The Market