Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.

Claim: World Health Organization says a “child’s presence in school counts as ‘informed consent’ for vaccination".

Q1: What is the WHOs policy on vaccination for children under the age of 16
A1: A 2014 WHO report outlines three commonly used consent processes for vaccination programs: written, verbal and implied.

Q2: According to the WHO, is a child appearing in school tantamount to giving consent for vaccination
A2: Some laws and regulations are
in place that identify school- or social-services
officials as appointed guardians for children
and adolescents not living with their parents,
including adolescents in boarding school. This is
also called “third party consent”. In such cases,
these third parties can provide consent for
medical care, including vaccination of specific,
individual children.

Q3: How does informed consent work, would parents be contacted in various ways before the consent is implied?
A3: An implied consent process by which
parents are informed of imminent vaccination
through social mobilization and communication,
sometimes including letters directly addressed to
the parents.

Q4: So if after these communications a parent has not opted out, does a child being at school imply consent?
A4: Subsequently, the physical presence
of the child or adolescent, with or without an
accompanying parent at the vaccination session, is
considered to imply consent.
user
justification: QAs show WHO’s policy is that a child’s presence can be considered informed consent if the parent has not opted out having been notified of the imminent vaccination via ‘social mobilisation and communication’ i.e. presence is not automatically deemed to be informed consent.

verdict: 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'
assistant