NZ Doctor’s Appeal of Covid Misinformation Suspension Heard 

Photo Credit - © Canva Pro Content License

For immediate release: June 30, 2023

Contact: Anna McLoughlin

[email protected]

+64 22 071 9314

NZ Doctor’s Appeal of Covid Misinformation Suspension Heard 

Doctor asserts suspension breached her right to freedom of expression and was an overreach of regulator power

WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND: June 30, 2023 – On Wednesday morning, Dr. Alison Goodwin was in Wellington District Court to appeal an extreme decision made by the Medical Council of New Zealand (MCNZ) that saw her suspended and without an Annual Practicing Certificate (APC) for 10 months during the Covid pandemic. Her “crime”? Speaking the truth as she perceived it – an opinion that did not align with the NZ government and MCNZ’s messaging.

In late 2020, New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out With Science (NZDSOS) member Dr. Goodwin started to speak publicly about her concerns with the NZ government’s Covid response and the lack of Informed Consent in relation to the Covid vaccination. As a doctor for nearly 30 years, most recently a General Practitioner and also trained in lifestyle medicine, she provided information to interested members of the public both online and at popular public meetings.

Despite no patient complaints and no evidence of harm being caused, the MCNZ investigated, harassed, and dealt heavy-handed punishment to Dr. Goodwin for asking questions and voicing her professional medical opinion. 

At no time in New Zealand’s past have doctors faced suspension for asking questions. Suspension is an extreme, not even assigned to deviant doctors who steal prescription drugs. She was prohibited from practicing medicine and earning a living for 10 months based on what the MCNZ saw as professional misconduct that allegedly brought the medical profession into disrepute.  

“It’s inappropriate and unethical to force a person to have a medical procedure against their wishes or under coercion,” says Dr. Goodwin. “At medical school, three principles were ingrained into me. Number one: first do no harm. Number two: the right to informed consent. And number three: the right to decline a medical treatment. All three of those things were ignored during the response so I had to speak up.”

Although Dr. Goodwin has waited for 16 months to be heard on appeal, she must wait yet again, as the decision on her appeal today has been deferred and is not expected for weeks.

Positive messages in support of her stance continue to grow throughout social media, showing that many people in New Zealand appreciate Dr. Goodwin’s words.


New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out With Science (NZDSOS) is a not-for-profit group of doctors, dentists, pharmacists, and veterinarians frustrated with the one-sided narrative of cherry-picked science surrounding the pandemic. They seek to protect and inform the public using scientific findings that show proof not propaganda. https://nzdsos.com Twitter: @nzdsos

For interviews or additional information, please contact Anna McLoughlin,+64 22 071 9314, [email protected].


See our exclusive series on doctors silenced by health authorities in New Zealand.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 46 Average: 4.8]
Share this post

Similar Posts

One Comment

  1. “Her “crime”? Speaking the truth as she perceived it – an opinion that did not align with the NZ government and MCNZ’s messaging.”

    The C***** distinguishes between formal and material heresy.
    The difference is the heretic’s subjective disposition towards their opinion.

    1. The heretic who is aware that their belief is at odds with C******* teaching and yet freely and willingly continues to cling to their belief pertinaciously, “who denies a necessary truth out of vincible ignorance or from an error held out of bad or doubtful faith”, is a formal heretic.

    2. Material heresy refers to an opinion objectively contradictory to the teachings of the C*****, which as such is heretical, but which is uttered by a person who does not know the belief is heretical.
    A person who holds a material heresy may therefore not be a heretic in the strict sense.
    Material heresy is an opinion that is such that by holding it someone “denies a truth that must be held by divine and C******* faith, but he is such because of invincible ignorance or because of an error held in good faith.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *