Mandatory Flu Vaccines- How do you feel? - page 6

by Snowbird17 25,493 Views | 206 Comments

Anyone else upset by the requirement to take flu vaccine or else... not even a mask option??? Only way out is a MD note stating "severe" allergy. Why is it we can't force our patients but our hospitals can force us. I am... Read More


  1. 1
    If you don't want the vaccine refuse it, with risks of being fired. That is my take on it.
    barbyann likes this.
  2. 0
    I don't know of any hospital who mandates it here. I will be getting one of my own free will, though.

    They can not mandate here, but in the midst of the swine flu huha, we were told if we didn't take the vaccine and got sick with swine flu, we would not be given sickness pay from the company, only statutory sick pay (government payment) if we were eligible.
  3. 1
    Quote from Jory
    Find me a single lawsuit that was WON where the patient actually collected to where they were able to trace back an infection of a common, everyone-has-it illness to a single NURSE. You'll be hard pressed to Google one that was even filed.
    You didn't say "won." You said that no one could sue for that, that "the court requires proof." That's lovely, but the court CLERK merely requires a filing fee. Between that and "proof" or dismissal, many dollars are shed. The question is whether or not someone will win. It is whether they will sue. When they do, the costs are expended, whether they are spent being given to the plaintiff or not.

    Your flippant attitude about lawsuits suggests that you don't have much experience with them.
    caroladybelle likes this.
  4. 2
    When I was hired my hospital required titers to prove immunization for a number of vaccinations; mumps, rubella, etc. They offer the flu vaccine in several different forms but don't require it. Even if they did require it, it's just another condition of work which is probably less dangerous than my exposure to HepC, HIV, hemolytic strep, MRSA, lice, scabies, etc in my patient population. Sure, we use precautions but nothing short of a moon suit is foolproof.
    Spidey's mom and HippyDippyLPN like this.
  5. 3
    sure , were forced( oh, i mean required) to have the flu shots, but the employees are still getting the flu, and pna, and bronchitis, and one recently had cdiff. Since they give us a hard time about calling in, everything is getting passed around like a hot potato. Oh, but we got our flu shots........
    morte, peasandonions, and barbyann like this.
  6. 0
    Quote from redhead_NURSE98!
    You didn't say "won." You said that no one could sue for that, that "the court requires proof." That's lovely, but the court CLERK merely requires a filing fee. Between that and "proof" or dismissal, many dollars are shed. The question is whether or not someone will win. It is whether they will sue. When they do, the costs are expended, whether they are spent being given to the plaintiff or not.

    Your flippant attitude about lawsuits suggests that you don't have much experience with them.
    It's true, you can sue for just about anything in this country, but you will be unlikely to ever get in front of a judge for the dismissal phase because unless you have money to waste, you will not find an attorney who will take that case. I agree with Jory, it would be next to impossible to prove a specific nurse exposed a specific patient to influenza when they can be exposed anywhere.

    This is why I don't believe hospitals make the mandatory flu vaccine decision based on fear of litigation or liability. No doubt, it's poor PR to have your staff hacking and sneezing all over patients, but I don't think that's the reason. I believe the main reason is the financial impact to the hospital from sick employees for 8 months of every year. It's a huge burden to have half of your staff out with the flu during a time of the year when the census is highest because half the patients have flu related illness. I've worked during those bad times in the middle of winter when the census explodes and staff are calling in left and right every shift. It's a nightmare. I see why they do it.

    I still can't understand why anyone would want to risk getting that sick and exposing their loved ones and patients to the flu when one shot can prevent it and you can get the vaccine for free and usually without waiting. The public stands in line sometimes for hours waiting for the chance to receive what the hospital begs us to have and gives us for free at our convenience.
  7. 8
    I just read at the nurses station that they want 90% of staff to be vaccinated for the best reimbursement dollars. So, I guess that is really what the flu shot is all about. Beyond that, I think economics drives it in most every sense from the money it generates for the pharma companies all the way to the money it generates for labor for giving it. I don't think it has anything to do with health.
    dcookRN, morte, Rizz, and 5 others like this.
  8. 0
    I was allergic to many different things as a baby and child and allergy tests indicated that I was allergic to many more to which I had no reaction and never had. One of those was eggs. I eat eggs with no problem
    and always have. I always got a flu shot and except for a severe headache that day, had no other problems.

    Three years ago, my PCP retired and my new one found the egg "allergy" note tucked away in the deep dark
    recesses of my chart and that was the end of my getting a flu shot every fall. I feel like a sitting duck!
  9. 2
    Quote from sharpeimom
    Three years ago, my PCP retired and my new one found the egg "allergy" note tucked away in the deep dark
    recesses of my chart and that was the end of my getting a flu shot every fall. I feel like a sitting duck!
    Walgreens and Rite-Aid and Sam's Club and Wal-Mart don't know about your "egg allergy" -- go get your shot there!
    Spidey's mom and sharpeimom like this.
  10. 0
    Quote from JMBnurse
    It's true, you can sue for just about anything in this country, but you will be unlikely to ever get in front of a judge for the dismissal phase because unless you have money to waste, you will not find an attorney who will take that case. I agree with Jory, it would be next to impossible to prove a specific nurse exposed a specific patient to influenza when they can be exposed anywhere.

    This is why I don't believe hospitals make the mandatory flu vaccine decision based on fear of litigation or liability. No doubt, it's poor PR to have your staff hacking and sneezing all over patients, but I don't think that's the reason. I believe the main reason is the financial impact to the hospital from sick employees for 8 months of every year. It's a huge burden to have half of your staff out with the flu during a time of the year when the census is highest because half the patients have flu related illness. I've worked during those bad times in the middle of winter when the census explodes and staff are calling in left and right every shift. It's a nightmare. I see why they do it.
    I agree with all of this, except for finding an attorney to take the case. I really don't think it'd be a problem!


Top