Mandatory Flu Vaccines- How do you feel?

dcookRN · Dec 5, 2012

They don't stop at flu vaccines either of course. The one that bothered me the most I think was the attempt in Texas to mandate the HPV vaccine to school age kids as young as 12. In this particular case, Rick Perry(governor at the time) tried push the mandate the vaccine with his super pact coordinator (Toomey) that had received over a half million dollars from Merck for promoting Gardasil. All for a vaccine that has been shown to have very serious health risks, and only offers possible protection from very few strains of HPV, spread by sexual contact and the associated cancer risks.

olddragger · Dec 6, 2012

The business of health care is going to put health care out of business. Thats the saying around here anyway.

Under the table deals, political influence and manipulation, apathy in the profession and more and more regulations will continue to change the health delivery system that we nurses work in.

There is a positive associated with this mandatory vaccination craze. At least now there should be NO DOUBT as to what hospital administrations really think of their employees.

I see more unionization coming.

HurleyRN · Jan 10, 2013

I am completely against being required to be vaccinated as a term of my employment. The arguement that I have the option of finding a new job is irrelevant. Injecting a foreign substance into my body is a little different than nail length or whether you have the right to wear piercings or tattoos. This issue has implications to my health and my ability to provide for my family. Not only is the efficacy of the flu vaccine not proven, but there is no way to prove what is IN the vaccine itself. Contaminated injections have drawn plenty of media attention lately.

I understand that as a HCW it is my obligation to protect my patient.....within reason. We scrub, we observe standard precautions, we use PPE's. Administration claims that this is for the protection of the patient, right? How about using some common sense and creating stricter visitation policies? It is a hospital after all. What is our focus? Getting people healthy and home or keeping the patient happy by allowing the masses to infect the hospital? In the past month, my closed unit has had isolation for MRSA, Norweigan scabies and RSV. None of the STAFF brought these things into our unit.

Here's another one.....flu is but a season. Mandation is year round. How about not threatening my job if I refuse to work a double when I say I am too tired to safely care for my patient? How about safe staffing instead of saving a buck? Or what about REASONABLE sick day policies? I don't understand how we can earn sick days but are not allowed to use more than four a year without being put into a disciplinary process. Sick staff come to work because they HAVE to, or potentially lose their jobs.....or is that another "choice"?

Just because I have chosen to care for people and have chosen to work in a hospital DOES NOT mean that I should be expected to sacrifice my personal rights. I think that it is a bit of a contridiction to say that my health and my family don't matter until I am on the other side of the bedpan.

So, no, I don't think I am willing to give up the rights to my own physical being, and I don't think anyone should be asked to. It scares me to think of what could come next!

Asystole RN · Jan 11, 2013

I am completely against being required to be vaccinated as a term of my employment. The arguement that I have the option of finding a new job is irrelevant. Injecting a foreign substance into my body is a little different than nail length or whether you have the right to wear piercings or tattoos. This issue has implications to my health and my ability to provide for my family. Not only is the efficacy of the flu vaccine not proven, but there is no way to prove what is IN the vaccine itself. Contaminated injections have drawn plenty of media attention lately.
I understand that as a HCW it is my obligation to protect my patient.....within reason. We scrub, we observe standard precautions, we use PPE's. Administration claims that this is for the protection of the patient, right? How about using some common sense and creating stricter visitation policies? It is a hospital after all. What is our focus? Getting people healthy and home or keeping the patient happy by allowing the masses to infect the hospital? In the past month, my closed unit has had isolation for MRSA, Norweigan scabies and RSV. None of the STAFF brought these things into our unit.
Here's another one.....flu is but a season. Mandation is year round. How about not threatening my job if I refuse to work a double when I say I am too tired to safely care for my patient? How about safe staffing instead of saving a buck? Or what about REASONABLE sick day policies? I don't understand how we can earn sick days but are not allowed to use more than four a year without being put into a disciplinary process. Sick staff come to work because they HAVE to, or potentially lose their jobs.....or is that another "choice"?
Just because I have chosen to care for people and have chosen to work in a hospital DOES NOT mean that I should be expected to sacrifice my personal rights. I think that it is a bit of a contridiction to say that my health and my family don't matter until I am on the other side of the bedpan.
So, no, I don't think I am willing to give up the rights to my own physical being, and I don't think anyone should be asked to. It scares me to think of what could come next!

If you take the man's money, you follow the man's rules.

Deal with it.

dcookRN · Jan 11, 2013

I agree with many of your views, and respect that you voice them. I only wish more people would, especially other nurses. We are advocates for our patients, and standing up for our right to decide what drugs go into our bodies has positive consequences that extend beyond ourselves, into the communities most of us became nurses to help. Many argue that everyone should receive all vaccines, period. To me, this is a very flawed position. While there are certainly vaccines that have benefits that should be utilized, there are also many that do not seem to fit the target populations, or offer benefits that exceed the risks. For example, my wife and I adamantly declined to have either of our newborn sons vaccinated against hep b, which staff attempted to do within hours of them being born. This one size fits all, mass vaccination policy is inadequate. It fails to consider the risks associated, or even the benefits, ie will the hep b vaccine even still offer immunity when newborns grow up and actually become at risk to any real degree of contracting hep b? I doubt it. As a parent, a nurse, and a free American, I do not want someone else deciding what drugs myself or my kids should receive. Especially when mandated schedules are written directly or indirectly by the very same companies that make and profit from the vaccines they push to mandate, with absolutely zero liability for any adverse events. It is known that vaccines contain many ingredients that one can logically not want to introduce into their body. Is there really adequate data to say with confidence, that injecting small quantities of mercury, formaldehyde, aluminum, polysorbate 80, etc many times a year, from within hours of birth to death, does not result in neurological disorders or other morbidities? I have tried to find quality long-term studies that answer such questions without success. We need independent, long-term safety studies that closely look at the effects of any mandated drug. We also need regulatory agencies that are not staffed with people that are on the boards of the companies they regulate. Bottom line, we should not lump polio, diptheria, pertussis, etc with rotovirus, chicken pox and the flu. The risks are not the same, and therefore the risk benefit analyses of vaccination should be distinguished. If the drug companies have their way, we will all receive who knows how many mandated vaccines. Look at how much the number of mandated vaccines our children receive has increased over the last few decades. Is it wise to manipulate, stimulate the immune system that much? Does anyone really know the long term consequences, or are we all unwitting participants in a grand post-introduction drug trial? They have tried to mandate the HPV vaccine for school-aged children. Where is the line? Wherever it is, I will draw it for myself.

Asystole RN · Jan 11, 2013

I agree with many of your views, and respect that you voice them. I only wish more people would, especially other nurses. We are advocates for our patients, and standing up for our right to decide what drugs go into our bodies has positive consequences that extend beyond ourselves, into the communities most of us became nurses to help. Many argue that everyone should receive all vaccines, period. To me, this is a very flawed position. While there are certainly vaccines that have benefits that should be utilized, there are also many that do not seem to fit the target populations, or offer benefits that exceed the risks. For example, my wife and I adamantly declined to have either of our newborn sons vaccinated against hep b, which staff attempted to do within hours of them being born. This one size fits all, mass vaccination policy is inadequate. It fails to consider the risks associated, or even the benefits, ie will the hep b vaccine even still offer immunity when newborns grow up and actually become at risk to any real degree of contracting hep b? I doubt it. As a parent, a nurse, and a free American, I do not want someone else deciding what drugs myself or my kids should receive. Especially when mandated schedules are written directly or indirectly by the very same companies that make and profit from the vaccines they push to mandate, with absolutely zero liability for any adverse events. It is known that vaccines contain many ingredients that one can logically not want to introduce into their body. Is there really adequate data to say with confidence, that injecting small quantities of mercury, formaldehyde, aluminum, polysorbate 80, etc many times a year, from within hours of birth to death, does not result in neurological disorders or other morbidities? I have tried to find quality long-term studies that answer such questions without success. We need independent, long-term safety studies that closely look at the effects of any mandated drug. We also need regulatory agencies that are not staffed with people that are on the boards of the companies they regulate. Bottom line, we should not lump polio, diptheria, pertussis, etc with rotovirus, chicken pox and the flu. The risks are not the same, and therefore the risk benefit analyses of vaccination should be distinguished. If the drug companies have their way, we will all receive who knows how many mandated vaccines. Look at how much the number of mandated vaccines our children receive has increased over the last few decades. Is it wise to manipulate, stimulate the immune system that much? Does anyone really know the long term consequences, or are we all unwitting participants in a grand post-introduction drug trial? They have tried to mandate the HPV vaccine for school-aged children. Where is the line? Wherever it is, I will draw it for myself.

I guess you do not eat any type of fish, or hell, any type of commercial foods then do you? Hope you don't drive a car... :nailbiting:

Everyone has a choice. If you CHOOSE to seek employment at an employer that mandates vaccines then you CHOOSE to be vaccinated.

Don't vaccinate if you don't want to. The CDC lists about a bazillion studies regarding vaccines. NOTHING is 100% in healthcare but vaccines, especially the flu vaccine is something that is pretty well studied.

If you cannot find adequate studies then you are not looking.

olddragger · Jan 11, 2013

asystole rn--i respect every ones belief. Yours also. I dont agree with it however. When I was accepted for my previous position many years ago the only test required was the TB test. The employer changed the conditions-- not me. In legal terms that can be a violation --if i wanted to pursue it. i don't--but I could. I agree with you that if a person is seeking employment and this requirement is present up front then you either accept it or not. It is a different thing altogether when a person is already employed and then this change of employment qualifications occurs.

Many many times several of us posting on this subject have asked for non biased evidence proven results concerning the influenza vaccination effectiveness. The ONLY piece that I have been able to find was done in a long term care facility YEARS AGO. That environment is totally different than in an acute care facility--as you know. So the results cannot be applicable.

some latest information: From newspaper Columbus Dispatch in Ohio.

An analysis by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota has concluded that flu shots aren't as effective as most vaccines, offering only about 59 percent effectiveness in adults ages 18 to 64. The effort found "a paucity" of evidence of protection for those 65 or older, who are at higher risk of complications and death, and inconsistent evidence of protection in children.

Historically, public-health officials, including those at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have said that flu vaccine is 70 to 90 percent effective, based on studies that the Minnesota group says are flawed.on: University researchers claim the annual flu shot is not as effective as we've been led to believe.A 3-year study at the University of Minnesota contradicts the conventional wisdom that the flu vaccine is 70 to 90 percent effective.

"When it works 59 percent of the time in healthy young adults, there's obviously room for improvement there," said Nicholas Kelley at the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.

Researchers reviewed more than 12,000 studies dating back to the 1930s.

Kelley says the misconception about the effectiveness of the flu shot is blocking efforts to create a more effective vaccine, which could cost as much as $1 billion.

"Why would you innovate, if it works that well?"

Kelley tells KIRO Radio the development of a fundamentally better vaccine is in the early stages, adding "we have a lot of ground to cover before we see one of these vaccines on the market."Like I have said there is a LOT of misinformation concerning the influenza vaccination going around.

Making this vaccination mandatory or loose your job you have had for years is just shameful. I think the focus should be on adequate infection control and visitor control. Make the flu shot voluntary.

wooh, BSN, RN · Jan 11, 2013

Mandating the flu shot is cheap and easy and makes it look like the hospital cares about infection control while having negligible benefits. How many people catch the flu AT THE HOSPITAL FROM AN EMPLOYEE? But it does lower sick days. When that's the primary benefit, what's to stop any company from mandating flu vaccines for their employees? Only outrage at the intrusion on employee rights solely to benefit the employer's bottom line. Of course in healthcare, they guilt us into it by saying it's for the patients' benefit, when it's truly only for management benefit.

Actually providing sufficient PPE, like masks and gowns, costs money. (Can I tell you how many times we've called for more gowns and masks and been told we're out of them? Like we're wearing them for fun instead of following policy!) Telling snotty visitors to stay home costs customer satisfaction surveys. Providing adequate staffing to allow for employees to call-out when they're sick would require effort and money. But all would protect not only against nosocomial flu but nosocomial RSV, rhinovirus, coronavirus, parainfluenzae, adenovirus, pertussis, etc...

But mandate the flu shot. It's perfectly in sync with all the other nonsense hospital management foists upon its employees in search of looking like they're doing something instead of actually having the testicles and ovaries to do something that would REALLY make a difference.

Clementia · Jan 11, 2013

I strongly disapprove of mandated vaccines. I understand that we're trying to protect our patients' health, we're supposed to advocate for our patients, etc. etc. etc. However, all patients have the right to refuse the treatment we prescribe for them. Why don't I have the same right to refuse that my patients do?

Health care is not all about the patient. It is also about the people caring for the patient. I don't see why the state, my employer, or anyone else has the right to force me to get a vaccine.

imjustme123 · Jan 11, 2013

I agree with many of your views, and respect that you voice them. I only wish more people would, especially other nurses. We are advocates for our patients, and standing up for our right to decide what drugs go into our bodies has positive consequences that extend beyond ourselves, into the communities most of us became nurses to help. Many argue that everyone should receive all vaccines, period. To me, this is a very flawed position. While there are certainly vaccines that have benefits that should be utilized, there are also many that do not seem to fit the target populations, or offer benefits that exceed the risks. For example, my wife and I adamantly declined to have either of our newborn sons vaccinated against hep b, which staff attempted to do within hours of them being born. This one size fits all, mass vaccination policy is inadequate. It fails to consider the risks associated, or even the benefits, ie will the hep b vaccine even still offer immunity when newborns grow up and actually become at risk to any real degree of contracting hep b? I doubt it. As a parent, a nurse, and a free American, I do not want someone else deciding what drugs myself or my kids should receive. Especially when mandated schedules are written directly or indirectly by the very same companies that make and profit from the vaccines they push to mandate, with absolutely zero liability for any adverse events. It is known that vaccines contain many ingredients that one can logically not want to introduce into their body. Is there really adequate data to say with confidence, that injecting small quantities of mercury, formaldehyde, aluminum, polysorbate 80, etc many times a year, from within hours of birth to death, does not result in neurological disorders or other morbidities? I have tried to find quality long-term studies that answer such questions without success. We need independent, long-term safety studies that closely look at the effects of any mandated drug. We also need regulatory agencies that are not staffed with people that are on the boards of the companies they regulate. Bottom line, we should not lump polio, diptheria, pertussis, etc with rotovirus, chicken pox and the flu. The risks are not the same, and therefore the risk benefit analyses of vaccination should be distinguished. If the drug companies have their way, we will all receive who knows how many mandated vaccines. Look at how much the number of mandated vaccines our children receive has increased over the last few decades. Is it wise to manipulate, stimulate the immune system that much? Does anyone really know the long term consequences, or are we all unwitting participants in a grand post-introduction drug trial? They have tried to mandate the HPV vaccine for school-aged children. Where is the line? Wherever it is, I will draw it for myself.

Very good post. I was just reimbursed for nursing school when I refused the flu shot that they instituted after school began. Glad to see there are others who will think for themselves and draw the line for themselves.

imjustme123 · Jan 11, 2013

I guess you do not eat any type of fish, or hell, any type of commercial foods then do you? Hope you don't drive a car...
Everyone has a choice. If you CHOOSE to seek employment at an employer that mandates vaccines then you CHOOSE to be vaccinated.
Don't vaccinate if you don't want to. The CDC lists about a bazillion studies regarding vaccines. NOTHING is 100% in healthcare but vaccines, especially the flu vaccine is something that is pretty well studied.
If you cannot find adequate studies then you are not looking.

Maybe those of you who are employed can pay all the taxes to support those who aren't.

tracyooo1 · Jan 11, 2013

I feel that unless you have an allergy to the flu vaccine, you should be required to receive the flu vacc, if I had a loved one in the ccu or a loved one that was going to receive a bone marrow transplant and I found out that a nurse gave my loved one the flu and they ended up dying there would be heck to pay. I realize this is a free country, but we made the decision to go into nursing......so that involves keeping our patients, our families and ourselves healthy. Just my opinion....I don't care to banter back and forth :)