Should the H1N1 Vaccine be mandatory for Healthcare Professionals? - page 4
This is a hot topic, so I thought I'd ask all your opinion of allnurses.com community. According a survey linked below, 87% of the public think we should? What do you as a healthcare provider... Read More
4Oct 7, '09 by lamazeteacher"A survey conducted in mid-September by the Harvard School of Public Health found that 53% of adults intended to get the H1N1 vaccine for themselves, but only 40% of adults were "absolutely certain" they would. Of the adults who did not intend to get the vaccine, or who were otherwise uncertain, 30% cited possible adverse effects as the reason, while 20% worried about contracting influenza from the vaccine.
Likewise, only 51% of parents were "absolutely certain" that they will have their children vaccinated, and of the remaining parents, 38% cited adverse effects, and 33% were concerned their child might contract another major illness from the vaccine.
Dr. Frieden repeated earlier CDC assertions that the new vaccine is safe. "It's made in the same way that seasonal vaccine is made each year by the same manufacturers using the same methods in the same facilities." And the safety track record of the seasonal flu vaccine, he said, is excellent.
He also addressed a misconception that H1N1 influenza is a benign illness that does not necessarily require vaccination. "The flu isn't always mild," said Dr. Frieden. "It can kill you." Quote from Medscape
I gave you a "kudo", Yin Yang, as a thank you. However I don't agree with you! It seemed rather arbitrary/strange that you have "drawn a line in the sand" after seasonal flu vaccination, but before H1N1 vaccination. I believe that a rationale is essential when making decisions that effect my/your life and/or the lives of others.
Being an independant woman who hates being told how to run my personal life, I question any dicta from on high, regarding that. However in my professional life, I do what is best for me and my patients and family. I have a newborn granddaughter and want to have the H1N1 vaccine early, in order to keep her safe; and have recommended it to my son and daughter-in-law, her main caregivers (not that they'll take my advice, as the "twig doesn't fall far from the tree").
I have read the research studies performed on H1N1 vaccine, and feel certain that it is no more dangerous than seasonal flu vaccine. I have taken the seasonal vaccine yearly for the past 20 years without ill effect (other than a sore arm and a few muscle aches). I am well and working when others fall sick during the season when flu occurs; and now that I've retired, my friends who refuse the vaccine get sick, develop pneumonia, and I sail on, unscathed.
I went to a clinic last May when I thought I had H1N1 (2 days into it), but the test given then was neg. I took the Tamiflu ordered, as well as doxycycline and was well within a week (which you could say was the normal course of any bug). However I believe I took the safest course to protect me and others.
2Oct 7, '09 by Glitterkitty, RNI have also had several reactions to "harmless" injections as well and also refuse. However, any employer hiring in the medical field worth any credibility should realize that patients aren't the only people who have rights as well as reactions to medications. If a patient was at a heightened risk for developing the flu but was allergic to eggs would you insist they receive the vaccination because of "protocol" or "statistics'? So why would we enforce that upon a workforce that is already short-handed needing help? If people are so concerned about catching the virus because some refuse the vaccination, then they have the option themselves to receive the vaccination to prevent that. Violating the rights of the healthcare worker is a poor method to protect those asking for such protection when it can be handled at the level of the one concerned while leaving others rights intact.
2Oct 8, '09 by Glitterkitty, RNQuote from diane227Since when was a grown nurse incapable of making health decisions for herself an needs the government to tell her what is "best for my safety"? We make countless decisions ON OUR OWN regarding the lives of our patients every day WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE, so why all of the sudden are we treated as children who cannot determine what's good for us and mama government has to?Yes. It should be required. For your own safety
2Oct 8, '09 by Beth RNWhat would be the benefit? Why not make everyone flying on a plane have to be vaccinated? After all, infection rates in other countries were effected by air travel from Mexico--- not health care workers.
Forcing anyone to be vaccinated would be like forcing people to lose weight, not smoke or drink, etc.
Until the risks of the vaccine are nil, no one should be forced to have it. Those in high risk groups, should weigh the risk versus benefit with their MD and then decide... not a law maker. If a law maker is allowed to force this issue upon someone... imagine what will come next.
If someone is worried about catching the H1N1 from a health care worker as opposed to public transportation, schools, shopping malls, etc., then I would suggest they get vaccinated and take the worry off the table.
0Oct 9, '09 by mcknis, ADN, BSN, RN, EMT-BThis discussion just goes to show how pathetic our country will be under a government-ran healthcare system. If we are already arguing about, "To vaccinate or not vaccinate?" then how will thing be then? hmmmmmm...
0Oct 9, '09 by rnwotwob1look what happened in the '70's with the first swine flu vax. it was a big fiasco.
the way the gov't is pushing this so quickly - makes a person wonder how much will be mucked up in the future. (Just google the last swine flu "epidemic" during the 70's)
0Oct 9, '09 by SkeletorI'll take a couple shots of 151, chase it with a shot of H1N1 and sip the night away with some MD 20/20 *wine
I'm willing to risk growing a corkscrew tail and waking up with some nasty morning oink
1Oct 9, '09 by Beth RNThe arguments posed are interesting. The reality is that anyone who is willing to allow another individual to be forced to take a medication through coercion (lose of job) or for any other reason does not understand the concept of freedom, personal liberty, and the right to refuse any treatment. Does it make any sense that a nurse could be forced to take medical treatment by an employer, but if that very same nurse was ill and sought services at an ER would that they would never be forced to take any medication they did not want. Under normal circumstances, the law states that a person has the right to practice self-determination and therefore, patients can not be forced to medical treatment against their will. Those who think nurses or any other health care professional should, does not understand or appreciate the US Constitution; let alone or how the virus is spread, the ways to prevent it, etc..
People need to look at their own health practices long before they need to worry about whether a nurse was vaccinated. Look at how many people practice dangerous behaviors that necessitate them encountering a nurse or other health care worker who may not be vaccinated. Stop the smoking, drinking, drugs, fast driving, no helmets, no seat belts, over-eating, not exercising, etc., etc., and maybe you will not need to worry about encountering the non-vaccinated health care worker. Please...its silly beyond measure.
Regardless of whether the vaccine is safe, not safe, beneficial or not, does not have anything to do with violating a persons personal rights. Medical care is between a patient and their physician-- period.
I wonder who will give the vaccine? After all, its against a nurses code of ethics, the standards of ethical behavior of a American Nurses Association, the patient's bill of rights, etc., etc, to force a patient to do something against their will. So, unless the lawmakers plan of vaccinating everyone, I guess there exists an issue.
I certainly won't be giving vaccinations to anyone who tells me they have been coerced into getting it. The health care system is already suffering a shortage of trained and qualified nurses. Would the general public be at risk more by being "taken care" of vaccinated unlicensed staff (that is who will be left) or well-trained, experienced, competent, non-vaccinated nurses, who know how to use personal protective equipment and wash their hands?
0Oct 9, '09 by penny0314Well, aside from those of us who are allergic to eggs (and I am allergic both to eggs and to Tamiflu!), we don't have a vaccine with any history and very limited testing. Further, it appears with H1N1, the older you are the less risk there is from this flu. Further, those born before 1958 seem to have little or no response to the virus. I am 61, I had it in the first wave, and was very mildly ill for 2-3 days only. Assuming I could take the vaccine, it might have made me sicker than the flu. We are professionals and can certainly judge for ourselves whether to risk this vaccine!