Nurse gives up career after refusing flu shot.

Page 4 of 4 [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

11 Jan 2013, 5:43 pm

Tequila wrote:
Who_Am_I wrote:
And if she had influenza, the patients who she could have passed it on to wouldn't have been able to avoid her, as they would be sick and confined to their beds.
Nothing wrong with refusing in itself, but she shouldn't expect to be allowed around people who are more vulnerable to illness.


Again, you're missing the point.

She exercised her freedom by refusing the flu shot.
The hospital exercised their freedom by refusing to employ someone who refused the flu shot.

The patients were protected and their freedom from potential further harm was maintained, as someone who hadn't had the flu shot wouldn't be allowed to work there.


Actually, the bit I've bolded was the point that I was trying to make.


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


PM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,466
Location: Southeastern United States

11 Jan 2013, 6:41 pm

visagrunt wrote:
PM wrote:
Safety is meaningless if it costs one person any amount of freedom.


What a foolish, romantic and utterly asinine notion.

If you believe this, then you are living in a delusional fantasy world.


OK, that statement may have been absolute.

Should we all be forced to go to a hospital every flu season and have medication that we could potentially have an adverse reaction to forced on us?

The above is the point I was trying to make, if they forced it on her, whats to say they will not force it on the rest of us?


_________________
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?


Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

11 Jan 2013, 7:01 pm

PM wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
PM wrote:
Safety is meaningless if it costs one person any amount of freedom.


What a foolish, romantic and utterly asinine notion.

If you believe this, then you are living in a delusional fantasy world.


OK, that statement may have been absolute.

Should we all be forced to go to a hospital every flu season and have medication that we could potentially have an adverse reaction to forced on us?

The above is the point I was trying to make, if they forced it on her, whats to say they will not force it on the rest of us?


They didn't force it on her. They just refused to keep hiring her.


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,146

12 Jan 2013, 6:46 am

PM wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
PM wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/nurses-fired-refusing-flu-shot-224637902--abc-news-health.html

I say she is brave for taking a stand for personal choice.

Goonsquad is correct. Her actions put patients at risk so the correct action was to sack her.

'The needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few'
Mr Spock, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.


Safety is meaningless if it costs one person any amount of freedom.

It's the long arm of occupational health and safety.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

12 Jan 2013, 9:27 am

PM wrote:
OK, that statement may have been absolute.

Should we all be forced to go to a hospital every flu season and have medication that we could potentially have an adverse reaction to forced on us?

The above is the point I was trying to make, if they forced it on her, whats to say they will not force it on the rest of us?


No, of course not. But when we agree to enter into an employment relationship, we agree to abide by the conditions of employment.

The point you are trying to make is a nonsense, because you are extrapolating the nature of an employer-employee relationship into an undefined relationship with a citizen. Who are "they," and what would be the basis for them to force vaccination on the rest of you?

You have a valid point to make about the freedom of individuals to refuse medical care, but you are using the wrong example to make it.


_________________
--James


Norah
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Gender: Female
Posts: 32

13 Jan 2013, 12:17 pm

PM wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
if she is so dumb she thinks the flu shot will hurt her or if she cares so little for her patients that she doesn't mind giving them a potentially fatal flu, i wouldn't want her taking care of me.


So, in your mind, safety is more important than personal liberty, no?


The way I see it, she shouldn't put someone else's safety at risk for her personal liberty.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

13 Jan 2013, 12:25 pm

cathylynn wrote:
if she is so dumb she thinks the flu shot will hurt her or if she cares so little for her patients that she doesn't mind giving them a potentially fatal flu, i wouldn't want her taking care of me.

Not getting the flu shot does not mean that you will give someone else the flu, as you can still have the flu virus on your hands whether or not you've had the shot, and touching someone else is sufficient for transferring the flu virus.

Getting the flu shot only means that you are unlikely to get sick from the flu virus once you come in contact with it.

So she'd rather risk getting the flu than keep her job -- not too bright, imo, but it is her right to do so.


_________________
 
No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

13 Jan 2013, 4:44 pm

I fail to see the problem.

Fire a nurse who does not comply with safety regulations.

Hire a nurse who complies with safety regulations.

Done.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

13 Jan 2013, 4:47 pm

Fnord wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
if she is so dumb she thinks the flu shot will hurt her or if she cares so little for her patients that she doesn't mind giving them a potentially fatal flu, i wouldn't want her taking care of me.

Not getting the flu shot does not mean that you will give someone else the flu, as you can still have the flu virus on your hands whether or not you've had the shot, and touching someone else is sufficient for transferring the flu virus.

Getting the flu shot only means that you are unlikely to get sick from the flu virus once you come in contact with it.

So she'd rather risk getting the flu than keep her job -- not too bright, imo, but it is her right to do so.

This is only partially accurate. One can be communicable with the flu before one shows symptoms, meaning that you won't be home sick from work but will be transferring your latent illness to everyone you come into contact with at the hospital.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,146

14 Jan 2013, 12:23 am

Norah wrote:
PM wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
if she is so dumb she thinks the flu shot will hurt her or if she cares so little for her patients that she doesn't mind giving them a potentially fatal flu, i wouldn't want her taking care of me.


So, in your mind, safety is more important than personal liberty, no?


The way I see it, she shouldn't put someone else's safety at risk for her personal liberty.

Exactly right, the hospital is only acting in the interests of it's patients. In addition it's meeting requirements in relation to recruitment practices from both a legal (Occ health and safety) and ethical standpoint (duty of care to patients). Open and shut case.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

14 Jan 2013, 1:24 pm

Fnord wrote:
Not getting the flu shot does not mean that you will give someone else the flu, as you can still have the flu virus on your hands whether or not you've had the shot, and touching someone else is sufficient for transferring the flu virus.

Getting the flu shot only means that you are unlikely to get sick from the flu virus once you come in contact with it.

So she'd rather risk getting the flu than keep her job -- not too bright, imo, but it is her right to do so.


Basic hygiene protocols will generally inhibit transmission through an infected vector such as you describe. The real risk to health care professionals is that we get exposed to every bacterium and virus that every patient we see is bringing into the hospital--the hospital is a vast cauldron of pathogens, after all. Now if my hands get contaminated examining one patient, then keeping my hands away from my mucosae and disinfection should protect both me and the patients.

But with an airborne virus, practices like handwashing are not complete. I can still get exposed to live flu virus if a patient coughs (and I treat PTB--there's a LOT of coughing going on), and I can inhale that. Similarly, if I have the flu and I am asymptomatic, I can be expelling live flu virus when I breath.

As for her right--I suggest that it's her right to give up her job and accept the risk. But it is not her right to keep her job and to fail to comply with legitimate conditions of employment.


_________________
--James


lostonearth35
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,783
Location: Lost on Earth, waddya think?

29 Jan 2013, 3:43 pm

I don't get it, mere mention of the flu vaccine on the internet and it's like WW2 all over again. I don't know which side I'm supposed to agree on, and if I agree a little with both sides they BOTH want me dead. If you get it you are a brainwashed, paranoid, bad stupid person, if you don't get it you are a heartless, uncaring, bad stupid person. My parents got the vaccine, I guess they must be very bad, stupid, brainwashed and paranoid although they don't appear that way. :( My mother didn't think she needed a flu shot because she thought she's never had the flu since she's never suffered gastrointestinal symptoms along with the cold-type symptoms. I told her that was a myth, that the flu does not always make you nauseated, in fact it often doesn't contrary to what the media and nearly every sitcom about it (which I REALLY hate) seem to think. I've been sick a couple of times in the past several years with body aches, chills, fatigue and fever but no breathing or stomach symptoms, not even a sore throat. It's like I'm not allowed to be sick any more and if and when I do it's entirely my fault and I'm a bad person and I should be killed and my body burned to reduce the spread of disease. I'm so tired of listening to this garbage for the past several years that I think that it's ironically affecting my health. I've been having trouble sleeping, I've had bad dreams and the past few days I've been getting stomach pains for no apparent reason. I wish I could just hibernate until sometime around May. :(



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

29 Jan 2013, 4:32 pm

lostonearth35,

There are two things that a person should keep in mind when making a decision about whether or not to get a flu shot: "What is the risk of flu to me?" and "What is the risk of me transmitting the flu to others?"

Once you have a sense of those risks, then you can make a decision about whether or not you are comfortable managing those risks.

There are a few classes of people who are at primary risk from the flu

-infants and young children
-the elderly
-diabetics
-pregnant women
-immune compromised or potentially immune compromised individuals (transplant recipients, chemo patients, people with HIV etc.)
-people who are chronically ill, especially those with respiratory diseases (PTB, COPD, asthma, etc.)

If you are in one of these risk groups, then you either have a greater risk of contracting flu or you are at higher risk of dying from the flu. If you are in one of these groups, or you are making health care decisions for someone in one of these groups, you can make an informed decision about how much risk you are willing to take. But, if you live with someone in one of these groups, or your work puts you into close contact with members of these groups on an ongoing basis, then you aren't just deciding about your own risk, you are deciding about other people's risk, too.

You are not a bad person for making decisions about your own health and your own protection. And you aren't a bad person if you decide to accept those risks and then fall sick. But if your decisions can affect other people, then you need to think about them when you are making your decision.


_________________
--James