Mothering Forums

Mothering Forums (http://www.mothering.com/forum/)
-   Vaccinations (http://www.mothering.com/forum/47-vaccinations/)
-   -   Is discrimination correct? (http://www.mothering.com/forum/47-vaccinations/1395879-discrimination-correct.html)

serenbat 01-16-2014 12:44 PM

Does asking about the vaccination up-to-dates/status of those around you constitute discrimination?  headscratch.gif

 

 

 

We see the post all over (not just here) on new mom's worried about those her newborn will come in contact with, we read story after story on both side about this but really do we have a legal right to know?

 

Each year the news is filled with increasing stories on medical professionals (mainly nurses) that are refusing job mandated flu vaccination, but what about others involved medically?

 

"Medically" meaning those who will or could have contact with a newborn…... Examples; paramedics/ambulance drivers (many unpaid volunteers), doulas, midwives, lactation consultants, MD's, OB's, nurses aids, others in a hospitable setting (food service workers, cleaning staff, maintenance workers, etc- all that could enter a patients room following delivery-NOTE here many facilities employee staffing agencies and staff rotates and not subject to facility mandates as they are contractors), even office workers doing paper work

 

                                     Where does knowing and or asking cross over to discriminatory actions?

 

We know that it is illegal (discrimination) to ask the disease status of employees and/or potential employees, and that this right is protected under many federal agencies. 

some additional info for those who might not know - http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/office/hep-b-letter.pdf

 

It is also not yet illegal to discriminate against vaccine status in the work place but that does appear to be changing.

http://www2a.cdc.gov/nip/StateVaccApp/statevaccsApp/AdministrationbyPatientType.asp?PatientTypetmp=Hospital%20Employees

 

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2013/related/proposals/ab247  

 

http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/277352/employee+rights+labour+relations/Wisconsin+Introduces+Legislation+Prohibiting+Workplace+Discrimination+Based+On+Seasonal+Flu+Vaccination+Status

 

What if it turns against the PROvaccinator - meaning what if mandates do become the law and the choices you make for your child are mandates? You may be up-to-date / follow the schedule but more may be added you many not want to do.

 

History has shown us that discrimination based on disease(s) has changed and that the minorities do get rights. Fear has played a major role in how society has looked at those with certain conditions/diseases and over time these views have changed. History has shown us countless examples of dicrimination against children, not allowing them in school or organizations based on "status".  Look at AIDS/HIV and the early days. Will vaccine status be the next? 

http://www.vaccinerights.com/healthcareworkers.html

 

https://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/nyclu-urges-public-education-and-voluntary-vaccine-h1n1-flu-warns-vaccine-man

 

http://www.riaclu.org/news/post/aclu-supports-seiu-lawsuit-on-behalf-of-healthcare-workers

 

With the growing number of nursing groups/organizations supporting nurses (who are on the front lines here!) right to opt out of vaccines, what will this mean to those of you who are wanting to know their status?

 

What about religion, that is also protected as a reason even in facilities that mandate certain vaccines- do you have the right to know about someone's religious reasonings? 

 

We know vaccines are not 100% and with the recent studies raising concern such as the pertussis issues http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/11/20/1314688110 and the Cochrane review on flu, how even knowing one's status really effect how well we protect ourselves or our children?

 

What if you were held libel for a post you made regarding knowing about the vaccine status of an individual, would you still make posts questioning vaccine status?

We see countless slander and libel suits against medical professions. Do we really know all the medical professionals status we come in contact with or potentially hire? Do we have a right to know what is going on in their family - do we have the right to know if their child, spouse, live in parent has cancer and they aren't vaccinated because of this ----- where is this line? We do know that lower level medical personnel, such as a midwife, doula, lactation consultant working outside of a facilities often are not subject to large mandates, many being self employed. Where does it cross the line to discriminate by asking? IF you do ask, do they have the right to ask the same of you, your child/children, significant other, etc - those they many come in contact with?

 

What about other discrimination headscratch.gif……………..what about a meet-up, mommy & me, playgroup, etc that wants to exclude those children that are not up-to-date YET the "group" meets in a public space such as a county or municipal center, public library, etc. - should they be sued for discrimination? What if there is a religious reason behind ones vaccine status, should you need to disclose that prior to a mommy & me playdate?

 

What right(s) do we really having in asking and/ or know others vaccine status?

 

                                  When is it really discrimination - when a law is passed or prior?


kathymuggle 01-16-2014 01:13 PM

Great post, Serenbat.  

 

Off the top of my head, I would say it is discriminatory if your actions are based on out-of proportion fear or ignorance as opposed to facts. 

 

I will add more later.  It is a topic I want to contemplate a bit before posting.  


rachelsmama 01-16-2014 02:18 PM

I feel that right now there's enough out-of-proportion fear about diseases for which there's a vaccine that yes, I think there's some discrimination going on based on vaccination status.  And besides that, vaccine status is generally irrelevant; the question that people really want answered is "What is the likelyhood that you are currently contagious with something that could harm me or my family?".  Considering the wide variety of illnesses in circulation, and the high failure rate of many vaccines, vaccination status should be a relatively minor factor when answering that question.  I would love to see an effectiveness comparison between mandatory vaccinations for healthcare workers and improved availability of paid sick leave (and higher staffing levels to make that work).  I get the impression that many nurses, etc...are pressured to vaccinate, but discouraged from calling in sick.


serenbat 01-16-2014 02:35 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by rachelsmama View Post
 

I feel that right now there's enough out-of-proportion fear about diseases for which there's a vaccine that yes, I think there's some discrimination going on based on vaccination status.  And besides that, vaccine status is generally irrelevant; the question that people really want answered is "What is the likelyhood that you are currently contagious with something that could harm me or my family?".  Considering the wide variety of illnesses in circulation, and the high failure rate of many vaccines, vaccination status should be a relatively minor factor when answering that question.  I would love to see an effectiveness comparison between mandatory vaccinations for healthcare workers and improved availability of paid sick leave (and higher staffing levels to make that work).  I get the impression that many nurses, etc...are pressured to vaccinate, but discouraged from calling in sick.

now since you are in Canada I know things are quite different here - had you seen this? http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1395136/not-allowing-exemptions-for-hospital-staff

the links rnra provided http://www.hhs.gov/ash/initiatives/hai/hcpflu.html
http://www.aha.org/advocacy-issues/tools-resources/advisory/2013/130503-quality-adv.pdf

 touch on it and I have seen it posted in regulations set to start in 2015 money to facilities from the federal govt will be tied into immunizations status of staff


chickabiddy 01-16-2014 02:54 PM

Quote:
What if you were held libel for a post you made regarding knowing about the vaccine status of an individual, would you still make posts questioning vaccine status?
 

 

I have a lot of thoughts but only have time to address this right now -- truth is an absolute defense to libel.  If I post accurately about an individual's vaccine status, it can in no way be considered libel.


serenbat 01-16-2014 02:58 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

 

I have a lot of thoughts but only have time to address this right now -- truth is an absolute defense to libel.  If I post accurately about an individual's vaccine status, it can in no way be considered libel.

I beg to differ - http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Libel+and+Slander

 

ETA- much depends on who deciders the suit - as we well know, when faced with a libel slander suite most (be it a company/corporation, even personal) many reach a settlement well prior to stepping foot in a courtroom 

 

I would greatly hesitate to name names, or give enough personal information on ones vaccine status in a "post". I would not want to invite the change of someone going after a certain person, if you feel you know that type of personal information on ones vaccine status and post it about them on a web site, that is clearly your choice.


chickabiddy 01-16-2014 03:02 PM

From the link you posted: "The fact that the allegedly defamatory communication is essentially true is usually an absolute defense".


serenbat 01-16-2014 03:07 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

From the link you posted: "The fact that the allegedly defamatory communication is essentially true is usually an absolute defense".

to each their own! http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/2013/03/30/surgeon-suit-over-criticism-posted-online-patient-husband-part-wave-such-claims/TLAp5DOMpZISPevfLL6B1I/story.html


chickabiddy 01-16-2014 03:12 PM

A criticism is an opinion.

 

A person's vaccine status is a fact.


serenbat 01-16-2014 03:19 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

A criticism is an opinion.

 

A person's vaccine status is a fact.

you would have to know their status to make that verifiable fact

 

if you feel you need to make such statements about the personal lives of other peopls, you have that choice don't you?

 

still, it could cost you $$$ if someone wanted to still go after you, they also have that right - right or wrong you can be sued and it does cost money even to defend an innocent person :wink 

 

 

https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/defamation


chickabiddy 01-16-2014 03:35 PM

I have no desire to search out and post about people's vaccine status, although if a person posts about being anti-vax and posts about working with an immunocompromised population and those two are connected publicly, I don't actually see anything wrong with that.  Let the immunocompromised person make the choice if s/he wants to work with an unvaxed health care provider.  Informed consent and all of that, you know...


serenbat 01-16-2014 03:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

I have no desire to search out and post about people's vaccine status, although if a person posts about being anti-vax and posts about working with an immunocompromised population and those two are connected publicly, I don't actually see anything wrong with that.  Let the immunocompromised person make the choice if s/he wants to work with an unvaxed health care provider.  Informed consent and all of that, you know...:laugh

if you have a hand it (so to say) in publicly "outing" someone, there is nothing to stop that person who was outed from going after you legally - having it hold up is different 

 

Informed consent is not a post- let's keep that in mind!

 

 

informed consent regarding vaccines -  http://www.vaccineethics.org/issue_briefs/consent.php 

 

some more on vaccines and informed consent - http://www.cdc.gov/VACCINes/vac-gen/laws/default.htm


chickabiddy 01-16-2014 03:50 PM

If I didn't have a family and a couple of jobs and other things like that that take up my time and energy, I would find it highly amusing to be sued for libel if I simply shared something that someone else had chosen to make public on the Internet.


Taximom5 01-16-2014 06:59 PM

My understanding is that the issue is not about making public something someone posted on the internet.  It's about posting someone ELSE'S personal health information on the internet without their permission.

 

Really, children who are not "up-to-date" on the mandated vaccines are treated pretty much the way people who were HIV-positive, decades ago.  And when you think about it, when was the last time parents of an infant required everyone who came near that infant to be tested for AIDS?

 

And before it was AIDS, people in the US were afraid of people of different races and religions.

 

Seems like there is always an excuse for attempting to institute a caste system.


serenbat 01-17-2014 08:05 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

My understanding is that the issue is not about making public something someone posted on the internet.  It's about posting someone ELSE'S personal health information on the internet without their permission.

 

Really, children who are not "up-to-date" on the mandated vaccines are treated pretty much the way people who were HIV-positive, decades ago.  And when you think about it, when was the last time parents of an infant required everyone who came near that infant to be tested for AIDS?

 

And before it was AIDS, people in the US were afraid of people of different races and religions.

 

Seems like there is always an excuse for attempting to institute a caste system.

YES Taxi it is about posting a private citizens private medical information - their legal right to vaccinate as they choose!

speaking of AIDS, just yesterday IRL I heard about someone who is in her late 20's and was SHOCKED that she was tested for AIDS/HIV and herpes because she was pregnant - WOW how fast things have changed! And IRL I know of no one who know's their OB's (let alone others) HIV status, Hepatitis status etc!

 

I would say some still FEAR people of other races (immigrants) coming into this country and their "vaccine" status- that still pops up in the news.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

If I didn't have a family and a couple of jobs and other things like that that take up my time and energy, I would find it highly amusing to be sued for libel if I simply shared something that someone else had chosen to make public on the Internet.

shake.gif

Never in my wildest dreams would I if I didn't have a family and commitments even think to share/post other private citizens medical information that would even cause someone to want to go after me and/or sue me! I would never have even thought of this!!

 

I can think of far, far, far more things I would want to do with my life, posting about private legal rights other's have to their medical information or job is NONE of my business!


kathymuggle 01-17-2014 11:26 AM

A factor for me in determining whether of a question is discriminatory, as opposed to just cautious, is whether they are cautious across the board or not.

 

I hope we can all agree that smokers and heavy drinkers usually get worse courses of certain disease.  

 

This abstract says smokers, in general, get a worse case of pertussis and that it lasts longer. Worse + longer = more chances for transmission.   I am not sure if they are more likely to get it in the first place if exposed, but it would not surprise me.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10882595

 

I have never heard of anyone going up to a nurse, in the hospital and wearing scrubs, and asking him if he smokes - with the intention of asking for another nurse if the nurse smokes.  And yet smokers are more likely to pass on pertussis to you or your child.  So yes, if you hyperfocus on one aspect of health and transmission potential and ignore other sources, which could easily be as significant - then it is discriminatory.

 

What I would like to know is if discrimination is illegal?

I don't entirely know, and if someone with a bit of a legal bent or who has done some research on the topic wants to respond, I am all ears.  I suspect discrimination in private transactions in ones home are legal.  Ex - let's say I was prejudice against Russians.  I could choose not to hire a Russian as my doula and I am not sure there is anything anyone could do about it.  However, if I was in a hospital giving birth, I could not say  "I don't want a Russian nurse."  The Russian has the right to work and the employers have the duty to promote discrimination free policies.  

 

The same could be said for vaccines.  I do not feel I have the right to ask a nurse if they are vaccinated.  The hospital screens according to their practices, and I just need to accept that as I walk through the hospital doors.  


teacozy 01-17-2014 12:01 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

A factor for me in determining whether of a question is discriminatory, as opposed to just cautious, is whether they are cautious across the board or not.

 

I hope we can all agree that smokers and heavy drinkers usually get worse courses of certain disease.  

 

This abstract says smokers, in general, get a worse case of pertussis and that it lasts longer. worse + longer = more chances for transmission.   I am not sure if they are more likely to get it in the first place if exposed, but it would not surprise me.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10882595

 

I have never heard of anyone going up to a nurse, in the hospital and wearing scrubs, and asking him if he smokes - with the intention of asking for another nurse if the nurse smokes.  And yet smokers are more likely to pass on pertussis to you or your child.  

 

So yes, if you hyperfocus on one aspect of health and transmission potential and ignore other sources, which could easily be as significant - then it is discriminatory.

 

What I would like to know is if discrimination is illegal?

I don't entirely know, and if someone with a bit of a legal bent or who has done some research on the topic eants to respond, I am all ears.

I suspect discrimination in private transactions in ones home are legal.  Ex - let's say I was prejudice against Russians.  I could choose not to hire a Russian as my doula and I am not sure there is anything anyone could do about it.

 

However, if I was in a hospital giving birth, I could not say  "I don't want a Russian nurse."  The Russian has the right to work and the employers have the duty to promote discrimination free policies.  

 

The same could be said for vaccines.  I do not feel I have the right to ask a nurse if they are vaccinated.  The hospital screens according to their practices, and I just need to accept that as I walk through the hospital doors.  

 

Only have time for a quick response. 

 

Your smoker scenario is interesting.  Do you have any evidence that a vaccinated smoker with whooping cough is more likely to spread pertussis than an unvaccinated non smoker with whooping cough?  I agree with you that a person who is coughing more/longer is going to be more likely to transmit pertussis.  But people that have the vaccine generally have a much much milder cough or no coughing symptom at all.  So you essentially concede the point that a vaccinated person with pertussis is  typically going to be less likely to transmit pertussis than an unvaccinated person with full blown pertussis.  So I disagree that asking for vaccine status is comparable to asking for someones smoking status. 

 

"However, if I was in a hospital giving birth, I could not say  "I don't want a Russian nurse."  The Russian has the right to work and the employers have the duty to promote discrimination free policies.  " 

 

I agree that you probably couldn't say "I don't want a Russian nurse".  I think there was a case a year or so ago where a father requested that no black nurses tend to his baby in the NICU.  The hospital granted the fathers request for at least a month before a black nurse filed a lawsuit.  I think she won, but I'm not 100% sure.  

 

I have heard that many women request female only nurses.  For religious reasons, or other person reasons many women don't feel comfortable with a male nurse seeing them naked.   What is your opinion on this? I am genuinely curious. Life threatening emergency situations are different, obviously. 


kathymuggle 01-17-2014 12:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Only have time for a quick response. 

 

Your smoker scenario is interesting.  Do you have any evidence that a vaccinated smoker with whooping cough is more likely to spread pertussis than an unvaccinated non smoker with whooping cough?

 

I am not sure there are studies that exist that compare transmission of unvaccinated non-smoker to vaccinated smoker.  I might dig a bit later, but I am not sure i will get anywhere.

 

 

 I agree with you that a person who is coughing more/longer is going to be more likely to transmit pertussis.  But people that have the vaccine generally have a much much milder cough or no coughing symptom at all.  So you essentially concede the point that a vaccinated person with pertussis is  typically going to be less likely to transmit pertussis than an unvaccinated person with full blown pertussis.  So I disagree that asking for vaccine status is comparable to asking for someones smoking status. 

 

Pertussis transmission is extremely complicated, as you know.  I will say that at this point in time I would prefer to have an infant near an unvaccinated person, rather than a vaccinated one.  At least an unvaccinated person will present as sick, likely stay home and if they do go out in public will exhibit strong(er) signs so I will know to avoid.  The same cannot be said for a vaccinated person who does not even realise they might have pertussis.  It is a bit of a die toss - who is worse:  the person who circulated in public before symptoms, starts a cough, becomes sick enough to stay home and or/seek a diagnosis  (timeline: 2 weeks) versus someone who coughs less, but is circulating for the duration of disease because they do not realise they have it  ( 6 weeks or longer).  Thankfully I do not have any  infants and am very cautious about cough, infants, etc.  I also do not smoke, lol

 

 

 

I have heard that many women request female only nurses.  For religious reasons, or other person reasons many women don't feel comfortable with a male nurse seeing them naked.   What is your opinion on this? I am genuinely curious. Life threatening emergency situations are different, obviously. 

 

This is off topic but a really good question!  As a general rule, I would say that no, an individual does not have the right to demand a particular type of nurse.  Let the hospital do their job - including assigning nurses as they see fit.  I am sensitive to religious and other reasons, but at the end of the day, I do believe people get who they get in public institutions, and unless the person lacks skills, there is no grounds for complaint.  If you really want a particular experience or type of person, I  think you need to hire people privately.  


serenbat 01-17-2014 12:30 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

A factor for me in determining whether of a question is discriminatory, as opposed to just cautious, is whether they are cautious across the board or not.

 

I hope we can all agree that smokers and heavy drinkers usually get worse courses of certain disease.  

 

This abstract says smokers, in general, get a worse case of pertussis and that it lasts longer. Worse + longer = more chances for transmission.   I am not sure if they are more likely to get it in the first place if exposed, but it would not surprise me.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10882595

 

I have never heard of anyone going up to a nurse, in the hospital and wearing scrubs, and asking him if he smokes - with the intention of asking for another nurse if the nurse smokes.  And yet smokers are more likely to pass on pertussis to you or your child.  So yes, if you hyperfocus on one aspect of health and transmission potential and ignore other sources, which could easily be as significant - then it is discriminatory.

 

What I would like to know is if discrimination is illegal?

I don't entirely know, and if someone with a bit of a legal bent or who has done some research on the topic wants to respond, I am all ears.  I suspect discrimination in private transactions in ones home are legal.  Ex - let's say I was prejudice against Russians.  I could choose not to hire a Russian as my doula and I am not sure there is anything anyone could do about it.  However, if I was in a hospital giving birth, I could not say  "I don't want a Russian nurse."  The Russian has the right to work and the employers have the duty to promote discrimination free policies.  

 

The same could be said for vaccines.  I do not feel I have the right to ask a nurse if they are vaccinated.  The hospital screens according to their practices, and I just need to accept that as I walk through the hospital doors.  

thanks for posting

 

discrimination related to jobs/working - there are a few types the US EEOC currently recognizes http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/

and each state can have additional for employment related as well as the Dept of Health and Human Services (regarding specific illnesses - ex. AIDS)

 

a lot of things in the US were discrimination (if you look back into history) and it only seems to be technically deemed discrimination once it becomes a law, does not mean discriminating against the status regarding vaccine status is not ? NO IMO it simply is not when you compare the exact same thing was once done to those with HIV, now being HIV+ means it is discrimination when applied to working with that person (hiring, etc) ---------so will vaccine status be the next?

 

with pertussis there really is no such thing as a "little" pertussis, no matter how "mild" one once to say it is- you still can spread it! (be it in a smoker or non!)  and knowing if that smoker is hacking with emphysema, allergies, asthma, etc ON TOP of pertussis is really a crap shoot!


serenbat 01-17-2014 12:33 PM

you were posting the same time!  As a general rule, I would say that no, an individual does not have the right to demand a particular type of nurse.  Let the hospital do their job - including assigning nurses as they see fit.  I am sensitive to religious and other reasons, but at the end of the day, I do believe people get who they get in public institutions, and unless the person lacks skills, there is no grounds for complaint.  If you really want a particular experience or type of person, I  think you need to hire people privately.

 

 

but we can still ask vaccine status - for how much longer? we can't for other things! 


chickabiddy 01-17-2014 01:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

I have no desire to search out and post about people's vaccine status,

 

Serenbat, you are deliberately misunderstanding me.  I stated that I have no plans or desire to publicize anyone's vax status and that's the truth.  But the idea of being sued for libel over telling the truth is so absurd that it's amusing.

 

Telling someone's "secret" isn't committing a crime.  It's being a crappy friend.  It's not illegal to be a crappy friend, nor should it be.


serenbat 01-17-2014 01:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

I have no desire to search out and post about people's vaccine status,

 

Serenbat, you are deliberately misunderstanding me.  I stated that I have no plans or desire to publicize anyone's vax status and that's the truth.  But the idea of being sued for libel over telling the truth is so absurd that it's amusing.

 

Telling someone's "secret" isn't committing a crime.  It's being a crappy friend.  It's not illegal to be a crappy friend, nor should it be.

 

 

 

I had used this quote---- I think others can read for themselves

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

If I didn't have a family and a couple of jobs and other things like that that take up my time and energy, I would find it highly amusing to be sued for libel if I simply shared something that someone else had chosen to make public on the Internet.


kathymuggle 01-17-2014 01:56 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
 

 

 

a lot of things in the US were discrimination (if you look back into history) and it only seems to be technically deemed discrimination once it becomes a law, does not mean discriminating against the status regarding vaccine status is not ? NO IMO it simply is not when you compare the exact same thing was once done to those with HIV, now being HIV+ means it is discrimination when applied to working with that person (hiring, etc) ---------so will vaccine status be the next?

 

 

Agreed. 


kathymuggle 01-17-2014 02:20 PM

I thought this was a great list of questions an interviewer may ask:

 

http://www.mtu.edu/equity/pdfs/whatyoucanandcantasklongversion8-12-04.pdf

 

Under health, they had this:

 

Health/Physical Condition

 

May ask “Do you have any physical, mental or sensory handicaps which might affect work performance or which should be considered in job placement?”

 

May NOT ask •    “Do you have any handicaps?” or questions that

divulge handicaps which do not relate to the job. •    Any questions regarding having received worker’s

compensation.

 

 

It does not cover vaccination, but it does highlight to me that people do need to be careful in the questions they ask.  


Ex Home Birther 01-17-2014 03:45 PM

There are people with compromised immune systems, they need to know the vaccination status of people around them. 


kathymuggle 01-17-2014 03:56 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex Home Birther View Post
 

There are people with compromised immune systems, they need to know the vaccination status of people around them. 

They can't, though.  

 

Unless you never leave the house you will not know the vaccine status of everyone around you.


teacozy 01-17-2014 04:30 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

They can't, though.  

 

Unless you never leave the house you will not know the vaccine status of everyone around you.

 

Sure, but you are a lot less likely to catch something walking past someone in a grocery store than you are through close intimate contact of a nurse or health care provider. 

 

A nurse puts IVs in, gives you medication, helps you move and walk around, helps bathe you, takes your blood pressure, changes your dressings, cleans your wounds etc.  Obviously you are a lot more likely to catch something from someone in that scenario than the grocery store one. 

 

Nurses make a deliberate *choice* to work in a field where they are going to have potentially close and intimate contact with people that are immunocompromised.  I don't think it's unreasonable to expect them to take every precaution possible to prevent spreading illness.  No coming to work sick and agreeing to receive certain vaccines are part of that.   

 

Bottom line, comparing expecting people to not go to the grocery store or bank without being up to date on vaccines and expecting health care workers to be up to date on vaccines is not a valid or fair one. 


Taximom5 01-17-2014 04:36 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Sure, but you are a lot less likely to catch something walking past someone in a grocery store than you are through close intimate contact of a nurse or health care provider. 

 

 

No, you're more likely to catch something putting your hands on the handles of a shopping cart that , in the previous 12 hours, has been sneezed on by 10 people, coughed on by 7, and spit up or drooled on by 4 babies. Oh, and changing money or signing debit machines that have been coughed on , sneezed on, and touched by people who coughed/sneezed into their hands and scratched their itchy eyes and noses.

 

​And if you take public transportation, there are all the people who would love to stay home because they're sick, but they'll lose their jobs if they stay home, so they pop a decongestant/antihistimine, Advil/Tylenol and lots of coffee and go to work anyway, spreading germs wherever they are.

 

Above all, don't forget the people who think they're not contagious because they got flu shots and DTaP shots--but they're STILL CONTAGIOUS, in some cases, even without symptoms.


teacozy 01-17-2014 05:01 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

If you were immunocompromised you would probably be pretty diligent about hand washing.  If someone who is having a bone marrow transplant decided they want to go to walmart during flu season, well they are taking that risk themselves. I don't think many people in that situation would do that and  I don't think any doctor would ever advise it.  But people who are otherwise following the rules but are hospitalized can't control the fact that they are going to have to be exposed to nurses/doctors and those nurses and doctors should take every precaution possible to prevent spreading illnesses.  

 

And just simply staying home when you're sick isn't enough.  Many many illnesses are contagious before there are any symptoms present. 

 

Can anyone here in all honesty say they would feel no anger towards an unvaccinated nurse/doctor that spread measles to their NICU preemie infant who then ended up getting encephalitis from it? Because that nurse had never received the vaccine and didn't feel like getting it?  Somehow I seriously doubt it. 


serenbat 01-17-2014 06:09 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex Home Birther View Post
 

There are people with compromised immune systems, they need to know the vaccination status of people around them. 

why yes, freshly vaccinated people should be avoid if you have such things as cancer

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

Can anyone here in all honesty say they would feel no anger towards an unvaccinated nurse/doctor that spread measles to their NICU preemie infant who then ended up getting encephalitis from it? Because that nurse had never received the vaccine and didn't feel like getting it?  Somehow I seriously doubt it. 

 Really you think every nurse is vaccinated for measles? you think none are exempt?

 

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/7/2/pdfs/70-0241.pdf

http://www.seemayasmin.com/pdf's/Pertussis%20Outbreak.pdf

 

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/should-not-vacc.htm

have cancer, pregnant, HIV/ AIDS, reaction to neomycin, etc

 

we do have to remember there are nearly two whole generations that have been HIV+ from birth, they grow up, and some do work in the health field - are you trying to say their aren't any?

 

Only during flu season do hospitable impose some restrictions on visitors, many hospitable have shared patient rooms, we are not screening visitors nor are we saying how long they can stay visiting. 

 

 

what about a worship service,     you can move but really you can not control who sits by you - communion anyone? 

what about a school class,          you have no right to know the vaccine status of others in your class       

what about having your hair done,  direct contact, very little control on others also being there and close by, not to mention sanitary condition issues

what about waiting in an ER,       you sit, and often wait by who ever and you don't know what they have if anything

what about dinner out,                you don't know who is sitting next to you, who just got up, who is in the kitchen, etc

what about a bus ride…………… anything goes!

 

all of which bring you in close contact if not direct contact with others, all of which last about 45 minutes, your average contact with a medical person is far less than that 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/02/health/policy/02consumer.html

By comparison, the average doctor’s visit today is around 19 minutes, according to theNational Center for Health Statistics.



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.