Should Non-Vaxxed and Alterna-Vaxxed Kids be Denied Emergency Medical Care? - Mothering Forums

 9Likes
  • 1 Post By Deborah
  • 1 Post By Turquesa
  • 2 Post By applejuice
  • 2 Post By Deborah
  • 1 Post By Deborah
  • 2 Post By baddestmanalive
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 9 Old 10-12-2017, 01:12 PM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,668
Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1752 Post(s)
Should Non-Vaxxed and Alterna-Vaxxed Kids be Denied Emergency Medical Care?

This woman tells a story of her and her child getting turned away for a medical emergency because her son was not up-do-date on vaccinations.

https://www.facebook.com/mandy.c.hin...55707774506866

Some of you here have argued that it's acceptable for medical professionals to turn away families not compliant with their country's vaccine schedule. Do you still find this practice ethically acceptable in emergency medical situations? The post author stated in the comments that she isn't going to sue the clinic, but do you think a lawsuit could emerge from these clinic policies?

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.” - Marcia Angell, M.D., former NEJM Editor
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Proud member of #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Turquesa is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 9 Old 10-12-2017, 07:09 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,582
Mentioned: 338 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2785 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post
This woman tells a story of her and her child getting turned away for a medical emergency because her son was not up-do-date on vaccinations.

https://www.facebook.com/mandy.c.hin...55707774506866

Some of you here have argued that it's acceptable for medical professionals to turn away families not compliant with their country's vaccine schedule. Do you still find this practice ethically acceptable in emergency medical situations? The post author stated in the comments that she isn't going to sue the clinic, but do you think a lawsuit could emerge from these clinic policies?
This is fascinating and strange.

Some of the points that leapt out and grabbed me:

1) Does this policy only apply to children? Do they refuse care to injured and ill adults who aren't up to date on all appropriate recommended vaccines? How is this discrimination justified, if it exists?

2) In a normal medical practice (non-urgent care), excluding the non-vaxed or incompletely vaxed is justified as a way of protecting other patients who would be exposed to diseases in the waiting room. Obviously, that doesn't work in this case, as the mother and son were allowed to enter the building and spend some time there before being booted. Think of all the illness they could have spread during that time! The only way to make this policy effective for protecting other patients would be to have a sign on the door and perhaps an armed guard.

3) I suspect that the real purpose of the policy is to harass, injure and humiliate non-vaccinating families. This is not a purpose that can be publicly stated, of course. It would be interesting to hear how they try to justify the policy. Or was it just that one doctor? Doctors are employees in this setting and shouldn't be creating policies on the fly. Should they?

4) Violating medical privacy is a definite no-no. Why would anyone want to use a facility that turns away an injured child, violates medical privacy, humiliates a mother in front of a room full of other parents and generally acts like a state security apparatus from a totalitarian state? Ugh.
Turquesa likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#3 of 9 Old 10-13-2017, 08:38 AM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,668
Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1752 Post(s)
Yea, the way the receptionist shouted out the kid's vaccine status should be grounds for her termination.

To address your first question, there are some cardinal laws that you're not understanding. 1. After age 18, vaccine status no longer matters. You only get to blame children. 2. Vaccines work. Until you get around unvaccinated people. Then they quit working. 3. Vaccines work. Until they don't. But if you point out that they don't, you're committing the Nirvana Fallacy.

The other thing they don't address is why they're requiring ALL of the vaccines on the schedule. If the policy were really about protecting people in the waiting room from casually transmissible diseases, why are they requiring vaccines for Hep A/B? It appears that they'd rather see a child suffer in pain and go untreated for severe bone injury than go without a Hep B vaccine for a single doctor's visit. This notion is beyond-the-pale paternalistic and controlling.

Finally, speaking strictly from their vantage point, isn't this the time to talk them into a tetanus shot? When my own child got a bone fracture, I learned that it's routine to ask about this vaccine. If they took vaccines as seriously as they claim, they'd do the same. Ironically, they would rather make this child risk suffering from and dying of tetanus because he's not up-to-date on his vaccine for tetanus. Serves them right for not getting vaccinated in the first place, right?
Deborah likes this.

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.” - Marcia Angell, M.D., former NEJM Editor
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Proud member of #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Turquesa is offline  
 
#4 of 9 Old 10-13-2017, 01:13 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 4,863
Mentioned: 531 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3492 Post(s)
I'll point out that we are only hearing one side of the story. As far as I know, the doctor and clinic have not made a comment (which is not unusual due to HIPAA laws).

There is also potentially important information that is being left out. The doctor and practice were "outed" on Facebook by an anti-vaccine page and it turns out that it appears that the urgent care clinic is for after hours and weekends. She went on a Thursday morning. During the weekdays, the clinic functions as a regular pediatrician's office. This likely explains why they told the mother to come back after 5 pm according to her own account.

I am not entitled to walk into some random pediatrician's office with my child who is not even a patient, who may or may not have a broken bone (unless it is sticking out of the skin, that is not considered a true life-threatening emergency) and demand that they see and treat him. It just doesn't work like that. The ER is and was there at her disposal if she felt it was a true emergency that couldn't wait.

The earth is not flat | Vaccines work | Chemtrails aren't a thing | Climate change is real #standupforscience
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by teacozy; 10-13-2017 at 01:34 PM.
teacozy is offline  
#5 of 9 Old 10-13-2017, 01:48 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 21,889
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
If one bothers to read the link, one would know that the mother had already been to the ER and was given a referral to local urgent cares.

Any medical receptionist who raises her voice to a parent with an injured child needs to go away.

A broken bone is not a time pinch emergency, but the boy should be seen. How is the situation OK for the mom to come back at 5:00 pm instead of seeing him now while the office was not busy? Another example of running a medical office for the convenience of the staff and not the community they profess to serve.

That was NOT an "antivax facebook page". It is a personal page and the mother is sharing her experience for others to learn from.
Deborah and samaxtics like this.

"Vaccines are like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get - acute hemorrhagic edema of infancy, allergies, diabetes, eczema, petit/gran mal seizures, ADEM, AFP, ASIA, CFS, GBS, JPA, JRA, LGS, LKS, MS, POF, POTS, RA, SJS, SLE, SPD, TPI, Henoch-Schonlein purpua, fibromyalgia, Retts Syndrome, encephalitis, Hughes Syndrome, neurological damage, coma, or death."

~paraphrased from "Forrest Gump"~
applejuice is offline  
#6 of 9 Old 10-13-2017, 04:17 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 4,863
Mentioned: 531 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3492 Post(s)
Yes, I did read it.

It was the mother's choice not to stay at the ER and wait for x-rays. She chose to leave and take him home instead of wait. That's on her. There is no law or rule that says she couldn't have taken him back to the ER the next day if she felt he was worse.

A potentially broken clavicle is not a life-threatening emergency. She could have stayed at the ER. She could have taken him back to the ER the following day. She could have taken him to an urgent care that had daytime hours which is what she ultimately chose to do. I think this is a lot of blowing things out of proportion. Pediatricians are not required to treat any kid that comes through the door with a non-life-threatening issue and examine/treat them. They are well within the law to have rules about vaccine uptake for non-emergencies.

She had plenty of other options.

The earth is not flat | Vaccines work | Chemtrails aren't a thing | Climate change is real #standupforscience
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
teacozy is offline  
#7 of 9 Old 10-13-2017, 05:53 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,582
Mentioned: 338 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2785 Post(s)
@teacozy
Quote:
I'll point out that we are only hearing one side of the story.
My irony meter went into overdrive on this one.
applejuice and samaxtics like this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#8 of 9 Old 10-13-2017, 05:56 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,582
Mentioned: 338 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2785 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post
Yea, the way the receptionist shouted out the kid's vaccine status should be grounds for her termination.

To address your first question, there are some cardinal laws that you're not understanding. 1. After age 18, vaccine status no longer matters. You only get to blame children. 2. Vaccines work. Until you get around unvaccinated people. Then they quit working. 3. Vaccines work. Until they don't. But if you point out that they don't, you're committing the Nirvana Fallacy.

The other thing they don't address is why they're requiring ALL of the vaccines on the schedule. If the policy were really about protecting people in the waiting room from casually transmissible diseases, why are they requiring vaccines for Hep A/B? It appears that they'd rather see a child suffer in pain and go untreated for severe bone injury than go without a Hep B vaccine for a single doctor's visit. This notion is beyond-the-pale paternalistic and controlling.

Finally, speaking strictly from their vantage point, isn't this the time to talk them into a tetanus shot? When my own child got a bone fracture, I learned that it's routine to ask about this vaccine. If they took vaccines as seriously as they claim, they'd do the same. Ironically, they would rather make this child risk suffering from and dying of tetanus because he's not up-to-date on his vaccine for tetanus. Serves them right for not getting vaccinated in the first place, right?
Well, a lot of what you bring forward constitutes the "anonymous commenters on news articles or facebook" positions. An actual institution has to have a clearer explanation of their policies and the reasons for those policies.
@teacozy has explained that the office in question is an urgent care facility only part of the time and the rest of the time it is a pediatrician's office. Sounds like a weird and confusing set-up which guarantees that people with sick or injured children will not always get the help they need.

My sympathy is still with the mother.
applejuice likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#9 of 9 Old 10-14-2017, 06:55 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Merica'
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
How comes this is a thing? As long as the parent's are able to pay for the expenses... How could you leave a child untreated? Leave the parents in that state they were the ones who decided that their child should not vaxx! I mean think about this for a second let this slide in. The way I see it this kid wakes up one morning and his mom tells him you need to go to the doctor to get a needle stick in you. He obviously won't be happy about it but he will do it because his momma tells him too. Another day he wakes up his mom tells him that he won't get a needle stuck in him. He might like this better and he will accept this. Children are children they don't do things on their own. Not vaxxing wasn't his choice!This is all due to his parent's! As I said if somebody deserves not to be treated it's them and not him... What the, pardon my vocabulary, fuck is wrong the these doctors? Jesus I really feel bad for the child!
applejuice and Deborah like this.
baddestmanalive is offline  
Reply


User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Online Users: 17,004

23 members and 16,981 guests
aircantu1 , Bow , CricketVS , Deborah , girlspn , hillymum , Hippie Mama 79 , katelove , Kelleybug , Lea Martin , lisak1234 , lorie2001 , moominmamma , MountainMamaGC , pokeyac , queenter , RollerCoasterMama , rubelin , sren , summer19 , verticalscope , zoeyzoo
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.