or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › I'm Not Vaccinating › Nurse looses job over vaccine - in PA!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nurse looses job over vaccine - in PA!

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2528129/Pregnant-nurse-29-FIRED-refuses-flu-shot-protect-unborn-child.html

 

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2013/12/mandatory_flu_vaccination_shot.html

 

Breton says she explained her flu shot reservations to her employer, and also provided a doctor's note which described her history of miscarriage. The doctor wrote, "In my view getting the flu shot would significantly and negatively impact her health because of the increased fear and anxiety it would create as well as the emotional impact it could cause if she does miscarry again."

 

 

 

 

please take the time to read some of the comments - some from nurses too 

post #2 of 16

That is awful! The poor woman!
Some of the comments were annoying. People looooove their vaccines!

post #3 of 16

I was fond (sarcasm) of this quote:

 

"I would say she has a million times greater chance of of having a problem if she gets the disease rather than the vaccine," says Dr. Alan Peterson, the director of environmental and community medicine at Lancaster General Health."

 

Really, Doctor, a million?  Care to explain the math on this number?

 

Maybe they can force a nurse to get a vaccine, or be fired, but they are now effectively forcing a child to get a vaccine, too…the fetus.  It would be interesting to work out the legal grounds for this.

 

Nice article, serenbat…I may paste it into debate in a few days and see what they think about it, (I will be making jolly till then, lol)

post #4 of 16

I just don't see the reason behind all of this. Employees are able to get exempt for religious reasons. Abortions are vilified but if you have a reasonable ground fearing a miscarriage due to a vaccine which even her doctor gave her a note for than that would be okay. Or what? I hope she can fight this in court and has to get reemployed. This is an outright scandal. I bet someone in HR did not like her.

post #5 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minerva23 View Post
 

I just don't see the reason behind all of this. Employees are able to get exempt for religious reasons. Abortions are vilified but if you have a reasonable ground fearing a miscarriage due to a vaccine which even her doctor gave her a note for than that would be okay. Or what? I hope she can fight this in court and has to get reemployed. This is an outright scandal. I bet someone in HR did not like her.

lie and you are A-ok (as in religious if you wanted to) have a MD (or I'm assuming her OB in this case) write and out the door you go! When a medical reason is not good enough for a hospitable!

post #6 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

 

Nice article, serenbat…I may paste it into debate in a few days and see what they think about it, (I will be making jolly till then, lol)

go ahead! :wink

post #7 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Really, Doctor, a million?  Care to explain the math on this number?

 

Haha, there's their favorite number again....what's the deal with a "million"??

post #8 of 16

"The intent is to prevent health care workers from spreading the flu to the elderly and others with weakened immune systems who are at high risk of dying from the flu."

 

But the Cochrane review obviously means nothing when it's not in favor of vaccination...and every warning label on the vaccines about not to use during pregnancy....is wrong??? :dizzy    Ok seriously, if I'm pregnant and have the choice between saving my child or saving a stranger - who WOULDN'T make that choice for their child?  I don't not vax because I want my child to be a walking vector for disease and bring back the plague (as suggested by many pro-vaxxers).  I do it for her own health.  I just can't stand watching people blindly give away my freedom to chose as they allow sh*t like this to happen.  I hope she sues and wins.

post #9 of 16
I also found the quote about a "million times greater chance" very interesting. I guess it is okay just to pull a number out of your a$$. The article didn't question the source of that stat and it is obviously IMPOSSIBLE to know as the drug companies admit there has been NO research done. In all the comments I read, only one person even touched on that quote.

Seriously, I am growing increasingly concerned. I think we are at the point where non-vaxxers and those who support medical freedoms and body integrity need to unite in support of people who are victims of these insane policies. Whether it be a petition or fundraising for legal help, or something else. I think we are eventually headed to "when they came for me, nobody was left. . ." It is time to speak up.
post #10 of 16
Thread Starter 

or reverse it! :irked http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2529157/Erick-Munoz-wants-pregnant-wife-Marlise-life-support.html

 

 of course in PA it's all about the mom and who she works with! the baby-of well

post #11 of 16

That one on life support, that's just crazy.  Mom is basically dead, why wouldn't the baby have been damaged? Why make dad have to go through all of that - raising a child alone already, watching his dead wife on life support to incubate a child that may never survive??  And then you see all the scenarios of well they could induce or c-sec at 24wks, do a hail mary and hope like hell the kid survives as a preemie and comes out of it unscathed - and if not, the dad gets to watch his baby suffer for how long before the child potentially dies as well or lives with life long disabilities? Or hey we can keep mom's body going even longer and hope she goes full term before the body says 'hey wait a minute, something isn't right', and miscarries.  So much wrong with all of this.  Government and politics has ZERO business making policies that involve personal health decisions - especially those involving life or death.

post #12 of 16

I don't know what I would do in that situation, and I feel sorry for everyone involved. However, I think I would like to try to save the baby. If I were brain dead, but my body was still able to carry the child, I think I would want to give the baby a chance to live. Actually, because of this story,  I'm going to tell my husband to keep me alive if I'm pregnant, even if I have no chance of recovery. I know I would want to save my baby, whatever it takes.

If the mother is brain dead, her body is just "there", so why would it matter to her if she dies right away or lives a few more weeks to carry the baby? She is not mentally there anymore, so she will probably not be suffering either way. The family is suffering, but the mother is not. With that being said, I do think the baby will be the responsibility of the state in this situation, since the family wishes to terminate the pregnancy. As someone who leans toward libertarianism, I hate the fact the state is involved in personal medical decisions, but it is in this case. It's sad from every angle.

 

 

Strangely, I can imagine the reverse scenario, where a family would want to keep the mother alive to support the baby, and the state refusing. Nobody wins in these situations.

post #13 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post

I don't know what I would do in that situation, and I feel sorry for everyone involved. However, I think I would like to try to save the baby. If I were brain dead, but my body was still able to carry the child, I think I would want to give the baby a chance to live. Actually, because of this story,  I'm going to tell my husband to keep me alive if I'm pregnant, even if I have no chance of recovery. I know I would want to save my baby, whatever it takes.
If the mother is brain dead, her body is just "there", so why would it matter to her if she dies right away or lives a few more weeks to carry the baby? She is not mentally there anymore, so she will probably not be suffering either way. The family is suffering, but the mother is not. With that being said, I do think the baby will be the responsibility of the state in this situation, since the family wishes to terminate the pregnancy. As someone who leans toward libertarianism, I hate the fact the state is involved in personal medical decisions, but it is in this case. It's sad from every angle.


Strangely, I can imagine the reverse scenario, where a family would want to keep the mother alive to support the baby, and the state refusing. Nobody wins in these situations.


ah, so sad, this mom has no say regardless what she wanted - wouldn't matter by Texas law anyway - even if you have a living will they will not honor it! greensad.gif wonder if they get her a flu shot?!
Edited by serenbat - 12/27/13 at 8:31am
post #14 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post

That one on life support, that's just crazy.  Mom is basically dead, why wouldn't the baby have been damaged? Why make dad have to go through all of that - raising a child alone already, watching his dead wife on life support to incubate a child that may never survive??  And then you see all the scenarios of well they could induce or c-sec at 24wks, do a hail mary and hope like hell the kid survives as a preemie and comes out of it unscathed - and if not, the dad gets to watch his baby suffer for how long before the child potentially dies as well or lives with life long disabilities? Or hey we can keep mom's body going even longer and hope she goes full term before the body says 'hey wait a minute, something isn't right', and miscarries.  So much wrong with all of this.  Government and politics has ZERO business making policies that involve personal health decisions - especially those involving life or death.

I read some more on this and apparently they have no idea how long she was out prior to the husband finding her, they know she didn't received enough oxygen, the baby didn't either - awful! To put the family thought this, not to mention the woman didn't want it either and they don't respect her desire at all. So odd, so over consumed with this baby yet in PA they could care less what might happen if the mom had a flu shot and her baby! messed up!!!!!!!!

ETA- there does seem to be many posting on the local news sites that are nurses in support of her! and mentioning that visitors don't need to have flu shots and they come in (and spread too).
Edited by serenbat - 12/27/13 at 8:33am
post #15 of 16
Thread Starter 

Does anyone know - (since this story is local in my state it still getting lots of coverage in many papers all owned by the same news group) - one post I read makes mention to the fact that hospitals get 1.5% reimbursement from Medicare/Medicaid and IF they allow too MANY exemptions they loose that - thus the reason (ing??) behind this - any info on that?? It was posted by a former nurse who also was fired for refusing the vaccine. Will also repost this in the debate section.

post #16 of 16

It may have been our original pediatrician, our ND, or perhaps both (state of perpetual brain fog here) but I had a conversation with one of our docs about this when the question of vaccines came up...actually I'm thinking definitely the original ped. Anywho, there were multiple issues there but all went back to insurance.  She wouldn't continue to see my LO as a patient if we didn't follow her visitation schedule because the insurance company would take issue with her if we came only sporadically. Also a convo with our ND, this one about vaccines, I was asking about local vax-friendly docs for a preggo friend interested in delayed/select schedule and the only one around here who fit that bill was no longer putting herself out there as being this way because her insurance carrier threatened to drop her practice if she didn't start following the vax schedule. So I have no doubt it would happen like that, petty sad though.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: I'm Not Vaccinating
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › I'm Not Vaccinating › Nurse looses job over vaccine - in PA!