In the final analysis, the fundamental question in this dispute between the child's two parents is this: What matters more to each of them, his or her own interests or those of their child? On one hand, there is the defendant father, who is unable to offer any reasonable, let alone compelling, reason why he should not be vaccinated or even undergo testing, resisting *708 both simply because he sees it as his “right” to do so. On the other hand, there is the plaintiff mother, who is fully vaccinated and observant of COVID-19 protocols, seeking the imposition of reasonable conditions on defendant's access not because it somehow benefits her, but because it serves to protect the health, safety, and well-being of the child.