top of page
Work Desk

Dear Sirs,

I am writing to you as both a concerned former pupil of St. John’s CE Primary School (Quarry Bank Road, Keele, ST5 9AF), and a concerned citizen with longstanding ties to Keele, where my family arrived in the early 1950s. Both my father and grandfather taught at Keele University for many years, and I, various family members, and many friends, attended St. John’s School over a three-decade period, commencing in the 1960s.

As such, I frequently revisit Keele, and when I did so on August 15th, went to see St. John’s school as part of a walking tour of the locality. When I arrived, I was deeply shocked and distressed to be “greeted” at the gate by what can only be described as a form of state propaganda, with two large banners instructing children to keep away from each other, and to get vaccinated as “the best way to protect yourself this winter”. The vaccination instruction was accompanied by a large and arresting image of a masked individual.

These highly politicised advertisements have absolutely no place whatsoever at a primary school, which caters for children as young as four, and where even the oldest children are just eleven. In the first instance, all of these children are legally exempted from mask-wearing due to their age, with the catalogue of evidence showing how deleterious mask wearing is to growing children being exhaustive. I sample a small selection of this evidence in the reference section at the end of this letter, where all statements made in the correspondence are qualified with evidence.

This means it is thoroughly inappropriate to be promoting mask-wearing to the under-12s, whilst – in reference to the banners’ other instructions – it is completely unreasonable and unrealistic to expect children as young as four to even begin to understand the concept of “social distancing”, without installing within them profound and lasting trauma and terror where they believe getting too close to other individuals, including their own closest family and friends, could kill them.

This is an unconscionable idea to install into the minds of small children, and the damage this will do to their delicate psyches and burgeoning relationships, now and for the rest of their lives, inestimable.

Please note that the prospect of two-metre “social distancing” as a method to control disease is based on extremely weak and questionable evidence, but even were the evidence more robust, this practice should never be imposed on young children, not least because all the evidence has consistently shown that they are at such a miniscule risk from “Covid”.

This being the case, children should never have been considered potential recipients for any Covid vaccine, and we were assured repeatedly by ministers and scientific experts in the early stages of the pandemic that they would not be (due to the vaccine being both unnecessary for this age-group, and the fact it had not been tested on them).

However, when pharmaceutical giants such as Pfizer - recipient of the biggest criminal fine for fraud in all of history - realised they could increase their vast wealth even further by targeting children (please note vaccines are for-profit products made by ultra-wealthy companies, and not benevolent charitable gifts from philanthropists), they decided to take aim at the nation’s young - despite the fact the safety data for giving this very new and experimental injection to children is deeply inadequate.

I have already written to every secondary school in the Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent area warning of the incredible risks of administering this injection to children aged 12-15 (tragically, one such school saw two boys die suddenly and for unexplained reasons in the same week – the week the local vaccination drive for this age-group began), but it never occurred to me that I would need to contact primary schools too, as I simply could not – and cannot – conceive of any pastoral environment caring for such young and vulnerable children being so reckless and cavalier with their safety.

Please find enclosed an information pack regarding the risks of the interventions your school is attempting to impose on children, and a primer on the critical legal and ethical importance of “informed consent” regarding medical decisions.

Primary-school aged children, by definition, are unable to offer this, since they are children (and children aged 11 and under are too young to be considered ‘Gillick competent’, even with the most liberal application of this frequently misused and exploited ruling), and therefore, any attempt to sway them into undertaking risky medical decisions such as vaccinations, with the type of state propaganda currently festooning St. John’s School, is deeply unethical to the point of being potentially illegal.

A school should be a safe, supportive learning environment for children, where they can grow, develop, and make friends, free from any adult political agendas being foisted on them. A school is certainly not a clinical environment, and the children’s parents are not typically present, therefore it is completely inappropriate in every way for a school to be promoting vaccinations, an intervention which – along with every other pharmaceutical product - should never be promoted to children, and only offered to the adults legally responsible for making medical decisions for those children.

It dismayed me greatly to see these aggressive and misleading pharmaceutical marketing campaigns defacing St. John’s School, as I enjoyed a happy and safe time at the school, free from inappropriate political lobbying or pharmaceutical profiteering, as did my peers, and many generations before us.

It is therefore of critical importance that such an experience is preserved for current and future generations, and that Keele’s children are not sacrificed as political pawns on the altar of further enriching the coffers of pharmaceutical companies – companies that bear no legal or financial responsibility if their vaccines irreparably harm or kill children.

Therefore, if these imposing banners, which represent an explicit attempt of the state to groom children into accepting risky and invasive experimental drugs, are not removed from the St. John’s School railings before term recommences in September, I will consider the school and its governors derelict in their responsibility to safeguard children, and I will pursue further formal action.

Please note this letter has been sent to [the Headteacher], [the Vice-Chair of Governors], and [the Chief Executive of Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council].

I look forward to your prompt reply.

Yours sincerely,

Miriam A. Finch

Founder, Informed Consent Matters

(Online readers, please note that each postal recipient of this letter also received four information leaflets, as available at the Informed Consent Matters leaflet store:


2m social distancing rule “arbitrary”, “not an effective mitigation measure”:

BBC quotes Matt Hancock: “the vaccine will not be used for children. It hasn’t been tested on children.”

Two children die at Newcastle-under-Lyme school in half-term week:

Pfizer fined $2.3 billion for criminal fraud – biggest criminal fine in history:

COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers have required that countries indemnify them for any adverse events suffered by individuals as a result of the vaccines:


By anonymous contributor

I work in the education sector, specialising in the analysis of education data. Over the last two years there have been many stories coming out of the schools I work with about the negative impact school closures and lockdowns on children's education and mental health. Children are starting school unable to speak fluently, and lacking in self-care appropriate to their age. Reading ability has declined especially in younger children. Children are starting secondary school well below where they should and schools are struggling to play catch up.

All of this, up until now, is largely anecdotal but there is an increasing body of evidence showing the negative impact of the covid lockdowns on the education of our children. This year saw the return of national assessments in primary schools following their postponement for two years as a result of the pandemic.

In early July, the Department for Education published data on children’s academic ability at the end of primary school (so children aged 10/11). There has been a large drop in the percentage of children reaching aged-related expectations going from 65% in 2019 down to 59% in 2022. This is unprecedented to see a decline not only on this scale but any decline at all, with standards usually improving slightly each year. This means there will be 38,000 additional children to normal entering secondary school in September behind where they should be. Given prior performance is the greatest predictor of later success at GCSE and beyond, these lockdowns have severely impacted the life chances of a huge number of children.

Research from the FFT education datalab has shown that children at the end of Year 2 (so aged 7 and 8) have seen declines in academic ability particularly in writing compared to 2019, before the lockdowns. Using data from over 600 primary schools across the country, they found that the percentage meeting aged-related expectations in writing fell from 70% in 2019 to 59% in 2022. In reading, the percentage of pupils achieving this standard fell from 76% to 68% and in maths from 77% to 70%. Attainment at Key Stage 1 following the pandemic - FFT Education Datalab We take an early look at how attainment at Key Stage 1 has changed between 2019 and 2022 Attendance at school Attendance in education and early years settings during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Week 26 2022

Attendance in education and early years settings during the coronavirus ... <p>A summary of attendance in education settings for the 2021/22 academic year, excluding out of term dates as d... Even though schools are now open and have been for many months, children have got out of the habit of regularly attending school. On the ground it feels like the lockdowns have altered the perception of the importance of regular attendance at school. The Department for Education collects daily attendance figures from schools. The latest published data shows that in June over 10% of children across the country were not attending school when they should be. This is over 800,000 children. Before the lockdowns, the overall absence rate f was half this. So on average an additional 400,000 children across the country are missing school each day. Schools are trying everything they can to get the children to attend regularly but it is having very little impact.


"In the news recently, we’ve heard from multiple Britons who’ve lost family members or sacrificed their own health to Covid’s not-really-vaccines. But anecdotes lack statistical heft. Sceptical viewers might too easily dismiss individual stories of the harms caused by the biggest inoculation rollout in history as freakish aberrations, mere coincidence (could relatives who happened to have been recently vaccinated really have died from something else?) or put it down to the cost of doing business at scale.

An official UK government report recently said that more than 2,200 Britons may have been killed by vaccine-induced injuries, but there’s plenty more hard evidence in governmentally collected databases that these fatalities are the tip of an iceberg’s worth of serious side-effects from Covid jabs. We don’t have space to do the subject justice here, either. But broadly, the frequency of dire side-effects from these vaccines, whose approval was rushed through on an emergency basis, are many times higher than those of traditional tried-and-tested vaccines (polio, MMR). Owing to troublesome, ad hoc reporting, the official stats may show just a fraction of the real numbers of Covid vaccine casualties.

I’m triple vaccinated – a status entailing three inoculations with an experimental medicine across only nine months; extrapolated, that’s four jabs per year. Many a well-adjusted, sensible member of the public (a description that may not capture me) must have made this same resolution: I do not want a second booster. Much less do I want a tenth booster or a 37th booster. As a grown-up, I’d also like to be given credit for being capable of doing my own research and weighing the odds on my own behalf. That means I don’t wish to be blackmailed, again, by being told that if I don’t let the state inject into my bloodstream whatever concoction Big Pharma has cooked up this week, I won’t be allowed to board a flight, cross international borders or eat in a restaurant."

bottom of page