Mandatory flu shots????

marmelloz · Mar 9, 2013

I just wanted to share something that happened that totally flipped my viewpoint recently. I also am not keen on the forced flu shots. I just "forgot" to get the one a year or two ago, which had started a heated debate. It hadn't been tested very long and there was much controversy about the ingredients. This year I took mine, but now that my former preemie twins are much older, and rarely get sick at age 12, we missed our call for their flu shot clinic, and I just thought "oh well". Well, since that time, and continuing to now, our hospital has been basically on disaster status, and our OB dept is jammed up with med/surg overflow to make room elsewhere in the hospital for all the flu patients. But what I really want to tell you is, that a month ago, my 12 y/o daughter got suddenly stricken with an acute case of the flu. It was so severe, she was fine, playing the computer, the vomiting and diarrhea, an hour later, within another hour she had passed out in the bathroom 2 times, and once on the way to the hospital. She'd fallen on her face, hitting her front teeth in braces, knocking 4 loose, and required an off hour emergency ER visit from her orthodontist. She was admitted, then cancelled, to make room for incoming patients. Within the first two hours, I'd gotten a frantic phone call from my son, that his wife couldn't breath and having chest pain! She came in before we left, and was admitted for two days with pneumonia. Our hospital hasn't stopped yet. We are all exhausted and basically every day, are forced to stay overtime and help cover the next shift, for half or all the (8hr) shifts. We are getting worn. All the area hospitals are the same. Nowhere to divert, and I was told today by our Chief Nurse, that it's no longer recommended to do diversions anyway "because having a patient's wandering in an ambulance is not as good as being in an understaffed hospital in a disaster situation". Sooo...I no longer care if I like the flu shot or what long term effects it might have. My daughter may very well have benefitted from that shot. What if she was one of the rarer people who die from the flu? How stupid would I have felt then? This is just my thinking process today. And believe me, I have been very opinionated about being forced (or a mask, but this was the first time offered, before it was threat if being fired) into having to take it. We will all be getting ours, as early as possible next year. Now I'm thinking more about what if I gave this to one of the newborns in the nursery, or an old lady who overflowed to our unit? Sorry so long...lol. Just wanted to add a different perspective.

stlrgrl · Mar 9, 2013

I understand both sides of the vaccine issue. I received the flu vaccine yearly until I had a severe allergic reaction to it a few years ago. Now I get tired of being treated like I'm a bad nurse because I don't get the vaccine. I also don't feel like I should have to explain my reasons for declining the vaccine to everyone.

imjustme123 · Mar 9, 2013

I understand both sides of the vaccine issue. I received the flu vaccine yearly until I had a severe allergic reaction to it a few years ago. Now I get tired of being treated like I'm a bad nurse because I don't get the vaccine. I also don't feel like I should have to explain my reasons for declining the vaccine to everyone.

I think people should be able to decide for themselves. I have an autoimmune disorder and also I watched my husband have a bad reaction to the flu shot right before he went through cancer radiation treatments. My husband works for a medical center and soon he will probably have to try and "prove" that he shouldn't get it. It's bad enough to have cancer and a reaction to the flu shot without having to "prove" you are not a bad person for not wanting to get it. My husband does not even have direct patient contact. He said he is willing to walk from his job over this rather than suffer like he did last time. It is too bad we have to suffer from people who would try and force us to do things against our will. It just seems very oppressive.

pmabraham, BSN, RN · Mar 9, 2013

Good day:

Thank you for the encouragement and for sharing.

For me, unless a given medical treatment works 100% of the time causing no damage to the human being who would take the treatment, the treatment should be a choice -- freedom / liberty. Things we should never take for granted.

If a treatment is 9% one year, who knows another year, never 100% effective and can harm you on top of it, to me, it is the equivalent of playing Russian roulette.

My frustration is for those judgmental people who state that if you don't get the "never works consistently for everyone, never at 100% success, may be extremely harmful to your body" flu shot that you cannot be a nurse or otherwise work in the medical profession.

Thank you.

Katieerin · Mar 9, 2013

I can understand your reservations i honestly do. I feel everyone is entitled to their beliefs and their opinions. I was against the flu shot also until i had a son. No medical treatment regardless of if its natural or lab created is 100% effective. I don't think anyone should be forced to do something they are against but in this field of work sometimes people are obligated to sacrifice that for the health of other people.

morte, LPN, LVN · Mar 9, 2013

If it worked, that would be different.

I can understand your reservations i honestly do. I feel everyone is entitled to their beliefs and their opinions. I was against the flu shot also until i had a son. No medical treatment regardless of if its natural or lab created is 100% effective. I don't think anyone should be forced to do something they are against but in this field of work sometimes people are obligated to sacrifice that for the health of other people.

Katieerin · Mar 10, 2013

It worked for me this year. I guess i am part of the 9%.

MrChicagoRN, RN · Mar 10, 2013

It's interesting that no one has challenged the misleading 9% effectiveness number that's been bandied about. The 9% applies to those over 65 years of age onl. For those age groups 18-64, qwhich will include almost all students or working caregivers, the efficacy rate is 46-50%. Sounds like that's a real good reason for us to vaccinate ourselves in order to protect our more vulnerable patients.

Also, Thimerosal is a preservative in multi-dose vials. It helps prevent bacterial or fungal contamination. If you want to avoid the Thimerosal, simply find a provider who will inject you with a prefilled single dose syringe.

Sadala, ADN, RN · Mar 17, 2013

We're about thirteen years past the 90's. It's pretty simple. You can choose not to get the shot, and facilities can choose not to hire your or to have you in their facility for your clinicals. Ultimately, its still your decision whether or not you get the shot.

macawake, MSN · Mar 17, 2013

Good day:
My wife and I use RO water; and do our best to eat organic food for which we do our homework as to its source, good and bad points, etc.
It is interesting I see zero answers on Aprotinin as well as would you consider buying or using (as your only means of travel) a vehicle that only worked 9% of the time.
Thank you.

To be honest I don't really understand comparing the flu vaccine to a car that works only 9% of the time.

If walking was very painful to me and I had to trek 10 miles to work every day you bet that I'd take the car that works 9% of the time (or if I happened to be younger than 65, the "car" actually works about 50% of the time) as opposed to walking 100% of the time.

Of course I'd prefer a "car" that works 100% of the time but for obvious reasons that particular vehicle has no place in this comparison.

Facts about this years influenza vaccine effectiveness:

CDC - Seasonal Influenza (Flu) - What You Should Know for the 2012-2013 Influenza Season

A little something I found that you might find interesting:

European Medicines Agency - News and Events - European Medicines Agency recommends lifting suspension of aprotinin

MunoRN, RN · Mar 27, 2013

The ability of a vaccination to produce immunity is always lower in certain sub-groups, including the elderly, this is nothing new. But if you believe this is an argument for avoiding vaccinations, rather than one of the main reasons why vaccinations in the general public are encouraged, then you have a misunderstanding of the theory behind immunizations.

The purpose of vaccinations is not so much to keep the vaccine recipient from becoming ill, it's more to protect those who are at much higher risk due to the illness. The catch 22 of immunizations is that you need a strong, competent immune system for a vaccination to work, yet those with weakened immune systems who are less likely to be protected by a vaccination are the same people for whom the illness targeted by the vaccine poses the greatest risk. When you get vaccinated, it's much less to protect you than it is to protect those high risk people. Since vaccines aren't all that effective in those with weakened immune systems (due to old age, disease processes, etc) they depend on everyone else to limit the spread of these diseases through vaccinations.

I think people often think that refusing a vaccine is a matter of autonomy, I'd argue it more a matter of selfishness.

amawrigh · Apr 10, 2013

What makes you think you are so right? Have you done the research from both sides? I have researched both sides of the argument, and the argument of mandatory vaccinations is not convincing. You cannot tell people that "apparently nursing is truly just a dream to you and not a life goal" just because they don't want a flu shot.

"The evidence base supporting vaccination is unsound and prejudiced"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3502850/pdf/IJFM2012-205464.pdf