It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Pregnant nurse FIRED for refusing risky flu vaccine

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:14 PM

Wow, more idiocy from the 'YOU NEED TO GET A SHOT TO PROTECT ME, ME, ME' crowd.

1. The flu shot only partially protects, and this is up for debate, from a few of the possible predicted bugs that might be going around. That it in the process totally whacks a person's natural immunity is not exactly new news.
2. The shot can have unforeseen side effects (really effects) and we've seen in the past how horrific they can be. The vaccine manufacturers have been made non-liable for any and all of these effects, which should tell you something. They can't even stand by their own product.
3. Hospitals are a hotbed of all sorts of germs and virii and you can't protect against the personnel spreading them around unless everyone works in Level IV biocontainment suits.
4. You HAVE NO RIGHT to expect your 'caretakers' to be sterile, which is what you're actually expecting here. Or they should quit their jobs.
5. Based on your 'well quit your job then' attitude, you wouldn't have a caretaker at all. NONE. There isn't a hospital in the world that doesn't have dozens of unfilled nursing slots, because people don't want to do this job, and you're advocating well trained people willing to do the job to just up and quit, cuz they're educated enough to know that the flu shot is a bandage on a gaping wound at best, and a dangerous hoax at worst?

Wow, just wow. Get educated. Your utter idiotic demands (in a society you're pretending is free) is criminal insanity.

Meanwhile, stay the hell home the next time you, poor baby, think you're sick. All the medical personnel are sick of your whining and bringing your germs into their workplace. Stay home and croak with your germs that weren't put into obeisance by your precious flu shot.

1. It offers over a 50% reduction in flu cases. It's not open for debate as that's proven.

2. The chances of having a side effect are minimal and these side effects are extremely minor. The chances of having a severe side-effect are in the hundreds of thousands to one category (if indeed that big).
If you wish to go to court there is a vaccine court put in place (certainly in the US and UK) for you to be able to do this. The companies are still liable, just not at an individual patient level.

3. Yes, by their very nature, hospitals are full of bacteria & viruses (that's the common term nowadays rather than virii) so you need to prevent them spreading as much as possible hence gel dispensers and vaccines. The more bugs which can be stopped the better.
Or would you rather nothing was done?

4. Pointless and irrelevant straw man.

5. Thankfully the overwhelming majority of nursing and medical staff comprehend the rationale behind vaccines and understand that any risk is absolutely minimal and is far outweighed by the benefits. The ones that don't should not be in the job as protection of patients is a pre-requisite of it.
If they're not prepared to do that then why are they nurses in the first place?
What other practices don't they adhere to "coz they think it's wrong"?

As for the educated part, I am very well educated on vaccines thank you, that's why I'm not hysterical about having them and don't consider it to impinge upon my rights.

As for the comment on the narcolespy, aside from being extremely rare, had they caught the flu itself they would have more than likely developed that very same narcolepsy.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:15 PM
reply to post by Scouse100

The nurse offered to wear a mask which would have prevented the spreading via coughing and sneezing.

Next time you happen to see a box of standard surgical face masks take a look at the small print.

They are effective at the most for 20 minutes to a hour after that their effectiveness is massively reduced, after that time you are getting more protection than the patient is.

According to the [url=]FDA[/u rl]

While a facemask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a facemask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes or certain medical procedures. Facemasks also do not provide complete protection from germs and other contaminants because of the loose fit between the surface of the facemask and your face.

In our theaters we actually have special suits that almost look like biohazard suits for high risk cases because we all know that those face masks are pretty much useless.

Then there is also the perception that the patient gets seeing a nurse walk around who constantly has a face mask on.

Sorry but a face mask is not a alternative to getting a flu shot.

Yes this sucks but if she works in a area where they say all staff must have a flu shot and she refuses then she has to accept that for the owners of the hospital patient safety comes before her paranoia about a flu shot. If she cannot meet the standards expected of her employer then she should be removed, yes she has to look after her unborn child and it is regrettable that they could not come to some kind of other agreement but at the end of the day the rules are the rules.

edit on 23-12-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:17 PM

reply to post by Pardon?

If the companies are not allowed or don't want to test on pregnant women, then how can you say that there is no risk?
You don't know that you are assuming, and you may be happy to put your baby at risk on an assumption, not everybody is.

I'll ask again, what risk?
You are assuming that there has to be a risk.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:17 PM
I'm amazed so many stars are being given in support of mandatory immunisation against flu for healthcare professionals.

You are all aware flu can be picked up anywhere, just because you work in a hospital setting, doesn't automatically guarantee that you will contract it.

I also think some may be mistaking flu for a bad cold.

Flu by definition leaves the afflicted so immobile, they cannot even pick up a phone to ring in sick.

Also I wonder how many advocating mandatory vaccination of healthcare staff in turn have issuses with vaccines in general?

Sorry to go off topic, but like another poster said, this wouldn't happen in the UK.

I along with other staff where I work have been offered discount flu jabs, yet we have declined, although it is not a health setting, regardless I still work minors.

Oh, just another side point, it struck me today...after all my years in retail how often I got ill with colds etc, yet in the last 8 months I have worked with children I have barely been ill once.

Just goes to show you, how ill handling dirty money can make you on a daily basis.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:22 PM
reply to post by snowspirit

I'm not saying they should be mandatory for everyone. I don't get mine nearly all the time, but then again, I don't work in a profession where I am at especial risk of contacting pathogens or infecting others with them.

This is an issue with anyone who works in a health care profession of any sort. You need to go into them with your eyes open. You will always be at risk of coming into contact with disease and spreading disease. It makes sense for you employer to do what it can to reduce the risk of spreading disease to its clients who are themselves part of a vulnerable population.

Consider it from the employer angle. How do you explain to the families of patients if your employees are spreading a disease that they could have been protected against getting and they wind up killing some of their patients?

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:26 PM
reply to post by solargeddon

The problem for health care workers and flu is different for pretty much everyone else.

including people who work in retail.

if you get a flu for example you might get a mild case that you confuse with a cold and head in to work, or you might get it really bad and take a week off and head back to work with a bit of a sniffle.

but in health care that creates a huge problem.

firstly its a matter of patient safety what might feel like a bit of a cold just a sniffle after being of work for a week with flu could actually be then passed on to a patient and that could be the thing that kills off your dear old granny. That is why if i see a visitor at a bedside coughing and sneezing I tell them to leave and not come back for a couple of days.

There is also a massive financial implication, if you work in a health care setting you are going to be exposed to more sick people with the flue than anyone else. So your GP or family doctor for example is going to be way more exposed than you might be. Then when he gets sick that one doctor down but where as you would take 5 days off he has to take 7 off because in accordance with our local policy anyway you have to be symptom free for 48 hours before you can return to work.

That is why staff sick pay is such a huge problem in the NHS just now, technically speaking if i have a bad curry and get one episode of the runs i have to take two days off. Even though for both of these days i might feel amazing.

Also in the UK all Pregnant women are now recommended to get a flu shot.
edit on 23-12-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:27 PM


Flu can be transmitted in an aerosol like manner by coughing and/or sneezing.
Simple hygiene helps but doesn't stop it spreading.
Having the flu jab stops you getting the flu and spreading it.
This is a simple preventative measure that works.
If nurses refuse a mandatory jab, they will be disciplined.

The nurse offered to wear a mask which would have prevented the spreading via coughing and sneezing.

There is far more evidence to suggest that a pregnant woman who gets the flu will do more harm to her foetus than will happen from having the flu shot.
So, looking the evidence, she has NO mitigating circumstances.

But you are not definitely going to catch the flu if you don't get a flu shot, so it's not like you are choosing one over the other, wheras if you get the shot you have definite exposure to that.

If she is incapable of understanding the empirical and proven evidence put to her about the safety of the jab and still point-blank refuses to have it then not only is she incapable of looking after patients but her whole competency level has to be brought into question.

What evidence? The manufacturers clearly state that no studies have been done on pregnant women or even pregnant animals.

I have done a lot of reading on this (I am pregnant). There are studies that have been done that show certain flu shots from previous years appear to be safe in that there has been no apparent increased risk of immediate effects on the fetus (i.e deformity or stillbirth) but nothing longer term. They also don't factor in the different shots on the market or that they are different every single year.

I was reading the other day about the Pandemrix 2009-10 (that year only) jab given in Europe has now been proven to have triggered or caused narcolepsy in children who took it. I sure am glad I didn't agree to have that one whilst pregnant or otherwise.
edit on 23-12-2013 by Scouse100 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-12-2013 by Scouse100 because: Typos

Rather than read up about it, go and actually speak to an expert in the matter.
If as your username suggests you live in or near to Liverpool, the Women's Hospital will be happy to speak with you at length to allay any fears. Or you could try Alder Hey hospital.
That's your best bet.
Unless you're able to discern what constitutes proper research and what constitutes nonsensical fear-mongering then I'm afraid using the internet will be counter-productive.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:45 PM
reply to post by Pardon?

A flu shot is a shot in the dark on what they THINK is the most prevalent strain. Working in a pharmacy for 2 years and heard countless times form Pharmacist that yes the flu shot may help but in no way is 100% fail safe. So this mother to be, is looking out for the health her unborn child and the fact that she has had miscarriages before, which i can only imagine to be one of the worst feelings in the world, and she is being fired for it? And sorry you can't protect your self form mother nature, you can try but the spread of viruses is a part of the cycle. So saying that all nurses need to have every vaccination possible so they aren't endangering others is ridiculous. Please let us know all the most recent vaccinations that you have recently got to protect all the loved ones you are around or the random people that you encounter

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 12:56 PM
reply to post by Sremmos80

Please prove to us that she didn't know before taking the job what the requirements were.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by ketsuko

Well in that same point please prove to me that she WAS told that if she didnt get a flu shot while she was preggos even though she would have a note from a doctor saying that it was not in her best interest or her unborn childs to get the flu shot that she would be terminated.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:07 PM
So much for "my body, my choice", eh?
I got my required Hep B vaccination back before it was prepared from a yeast and I seroconverted. I've never had Hep B but I can no longer give blood because my bloodwork shows up positive for the disease. I have a rare blood type so it's a bit of a loss to the blood banks that I'm no longer able to donate.
The hospitals here started making it mandatory that we (healthcare workers) all get the yearly flu shots and it resulted in more healthcare workers calling in sick due to effects of the shots. (Personal observation)
All the people demanding nurses get out of the profession if they don't want to do what you think they careful what you wish for. I've done exactly that. When the hospitals get overloaded from disaster or pandemic scenarios, don't bother calling me. I know how to take care of myself and loved ones. The rest of you can do what you think best for your health and good luck to you.
Nurses (mainly female) need to learn to stand up for themselves and just say "no" to the slave expectations of the overlords (administrators). We are not personal (or public) property.
I can't tell you how many times I've had to correct doctors on the correct administration of medications of all sorts. Tell ya something else; when you come into the hospital, it's not the doctor that keeps you alive, it's your nurse. Better hope you get a good one with a backbone able to stand up to the doctor because "just following orders (or protocols) has killed more patients than you might be comfortable learning about.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:10 PM
reply to post by Sremmos80

I'm guessing there is more to this story that we don't know. It seems entirely harsh to fire someone just for this. I'm surprised they didn't offer a leave of absence. It makes me wonder if she was a difficult employee.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:14 PM
reply to post by whitewave

The thing is that it's very easy to point to the negative things connected with shots, but it's not easy to point to the number of people who may have been protected or even saved by shots.

The negatives are very obvious when they happen (assuming, of course, all the negatives were directly caused by the shot), but no one can look at that person who would have caught the flu if not for either them or someone near them taking the shot or maybe even had their life saved by it because it didn't happen which was the whole point.

It makes the anti-vaccine crowd's job easy.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:33 PM
reply to post by ketsuko

I can agree with ya there, seems like there should of been an alt punishment (for the lack of a better word that i cant think of) I also agree that there could of been some behind the scenes stuff this article didn't cover that coulda attributed to the firing, but ya it was for the refusal of the shot alone, then I don't see a just firing

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:35 PM

if you get a flu for example you might get a mild case that you confuse with a cold and head in to work, or you might get it really bad and take a week off and head back to work with a bit of a sniffle.

Stop right there!

As I pointed out in my post, there is no mild flu...flu is flu, it's can't get out of bed, can't ring in sick!

Anything else ouside of those parameters is classed as a bad cold.

Regardless what you say about retail ( I no longer work in it so it's a moot point), you are still exposed to the general populous, germs and all.

In the 8 months since I have left, I have never felt better, lack of colds etc, regardless of working with children and smoking ( I know how much people love to wheel that one out as a immune suppressant).

Interestingly enough, the last time I was this healthy, strangely, was prior to my first ever employment.

I take this as proof positive, it's not just health professionals who are affected by working with the diseased population at large...we are all affected.

Also to note, as someone else remarked, the flu jab is not 100%, it changes with which strain is predicted to be the most troublesome for any given year.

Believe me, I am pro vaccine, but I am not pro forced to vaccinate against personal preference due to employment.

It's your call the shots, in nursing, there will be staff susceptible to flu, there will be staff who aren't, regardless that's just how the cookie crumbles.

I don't want to make this analogy, but the principle one would tell you to have an abortion or risk being sacked now would they?!
edit on 23-12-2013 by solargeddon because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-12-2013 by solargeddon because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-12-2013 by solargeddon because: Typos!

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:37 PM
reply to post by Maluhia

They constantly tried to shove this down my throat while I was pregnant and I constantly told them NO!

I can honestly say that everyone of my friends who has talked about getting a Flu vaccine actually GOT the flu after. They all said it was the worst flu ever.

I dated a military guy years ago who had to get the flu vaccine but it wasn't a shot but a nasal spray. He always dreaded it because he got sick every single time from it!

yea no thanks.

She should not have been fired. It's HER body and they have no right to tell her what to put in it. If everyone else is vaccinated then what is the problem? Can't she wear a mask? All this doom and gloom about the flu is insane.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:41 PM

Tell ya something else; when you come into the hospital, it's not the doctor that keeps you alive, it's your nurse. Better hope you get a good one with a backbone able to stand up to the doctor because "just following orders (or protocols) has killed more patients than you might be comfortable learning about.

The part I highlighted a friend on FB said this to me recently! She is so right too. I have had more nurses give me advice and correct doctor mistakes than anything. Recently I had a nurse stand up to the doctor about a prescription he was trying to give me that I said front eh beginning i didn't want because it always makes me sick. She went back and after 20mins got him to change it. She then told me to say I'm allergic to it from now on so nobody tries to give it to me. She was one of the best nurses I've ever dealt with!

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:45 PM
reply to post by solargeddon

Check the edit,

what i mean is that you could have flu, come back to work with a sniffle and a bit of a cough or whatever but still be infectious. As a result i could kill a patient inadvertently by giving him the flu and i cost the tax payer because they need to pay for my sick leave. I have had the flu shot for the last 5 years and never been of sick with the flu.

but yes you can get mild flu

Flu symptoms can be mild or severe, and can come on suddenly — be sure you know your flu treatment options so you can be prepared. Symptoms generally appear 1 to 4 days after exposure to the virus.

edit on 23-12-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:50 PM
Reading all the posts above made the last minutes
of my existence very desperating.

I am a Nurse and I couldn't bear all the oppression I've had to endure at the hospital in the last few weeks. They almost forced us to take their so-called 'miracle vaccines' every day of the WHOLE month of November.

For those of you who think that being a nurse in this system equals the duty of being vaccinated... I say complete BS.

If people really wanted to have a strong immune system and healty life, they would do it all by themselves. No need of an exterior human entity (Nurses in this instance) to be vaccinated in order to protect their own lifes.

Seriously, the immune body system is built with the idea of resisting to virus like influenza, no need of vaccination for that.

The thing people don't seem to understand is that in order to be healthy you've got to make some actions in regards to it. But people nowadays don't give a #.

They don't eat well, they don't exercise everyday, they don't sleep well, they are stressed, they are unhappy, all they do is consume entertainment etc etc etc, and then, they complain and beg for a vaccine they think will help protect their miserable life.

Let me tell you something. You want to be protected from virus and bacteria? Don't count on vaccinated hospital staff for that, but work towards it in your own life.

BE healthy, and stop seeking it.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:53 PM
It should be criminal to vaccinate when you're pregnant due to the high risk of permanent and severe fetal damage. This is only about money, that is clear, they do not care about the health of your baby. No educated and informed mother-to-be would risk a vaccine during pregnancy.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in