I am a nursing student in NY about to take NCLEX in a few days. In New York they passed a bill about the Mandatory Flu Shot. I am all for patient safety and preventing a world wide Invasion (u know that movie with Nicole Kidman) get your shot kind of sickness but this is ridiculous and the fact that it happened in NEW YORK CITY first scares the crap out of me and seemingly out of the blue. I see this issue is posted in the Pandemic section but this is a general nursing concern because I mean once again:
it happened in NEW YORK CITY first, it can definitely happen to you in your state
what else are they gonna mandate?
that's why I think it should be in the general nursing forum section...
off my soapbox now and retreating back :chair:
does anybody else see where I am going with this... I mean where does this end because this shouldn't have begun
this can get ugly relatively quickly.
And it could be your state next with a flu shot or something else
It's really not a big deal to me. I'd rather get the flu shot than be responsible for killing somebody's Grandma or preemie baby because I didn't want to be told what to do.
When someone joins the millitary (we still have an all-volunteer millitary), they agree to give up some of their rights. Some have posted before, about all the required vaccines that people must take in the millitary (even to the point of being REvaccinated if documentation was lost of previous vaccines administered by the millitary). If health care becomes "taken over" (run by the government), will we "all be soldiers now" as health care professionals? Will the government be able to require whatever they feel they need to in order to keep health care operating in this nation. That could include mandatory vaccinations in order to keep HCPs working with less of them calling off sick. Even if vaccination of all HCPs reduces illness in workers by 20% it would be worth it to the government to have less HCPs out sick. I am still not convinced that vaccinating every nurse/doctor in the hospital will significantly reduce transmission of the flu to patients as long as we allow unvaccinated/unmasked visitors and anncillary personnel to have contact with patients. What about the patient we send home to infectious family members? What's the point?
Among a population of a given density (i.e., possible number of daily contacts with others) and a disease of a given communicability, there is a threshold of vaccinations below which an epidemic will take place, and above which it won't. In every population, there are those who will and those who won't get themselves and their families vaccinated. Those who will, contribute to the welfare of the entire community by pushing the percentage of the population inoculated above the threshold despite certain risks to themselves and their families. The others take no risks and sponge off the benefits created by those who get the shots. Unfortunately, there is no kinder way of putting this.
No one has yet answered the question about requiring the vaccine for persons who have had a previous allergic reaction. Using a very broad interpretation of the ADA, it seems that it would be illegal to terminate someone who can't take the shot for that reason. You can bet some legal eagle is already working on a case using that very argument.
There is no mandate in Texas as yet. It doesn't really make any difference to me if there is. With my particular situation I pretty much feel obligated to get the vaccination anyway since I have someone at home with a wide variety of chronic problems. Just for the record, the two worst cases of the flu I ever had happened about 3 months after receiving a flu shot. Both times it put me out of commission for a couple of weeks so the argument about only being protected against certain strains is very valid from my point of view.
I don't like the idea of the government mandating the vaccines. If a facility wants to make it mandatory, it then becomes a condition of employment but you still have a choice. But for "Big Brother" to single out one or two segments of the population is just plain wrong and might even be considered unconstitutional. You can bet that some smart legal eagle is working that angle as well.
Seriously, what is the big deal? I live in NY, and FYI, it is New York State, not NYC that is mandating the flu shot, so get your facts straight.
You are already mandated to:
1) Have a negative PPD
2) Either have the Hep B vaccine, have a positive titer, or sign a statement basically saying it's on you if you get Hep B.
3) Have a positive Measles titer
4) Have a positive Rubella titer
5) Have a positive Mumps titer
6) Have a negative drug screen...
In order to work in a healthcare facility
Is having a mandatory flu shot really that much more to ask? You are in a position to work very closely to some of the most vulnerable members of the community. Is it too much to ask that you protect yourself, and your patients from getting a highly preventable virus? I personally have gotten the flu shot every year that my employer has offered it to me. It has made me feel sick every time, but I've gotten it, because it's what they ask of me.
They also ask me to park in a certain place, and I do that. It's called a condition of employment. If I don't like it, I can go work someplace else.
(Hint: nursing home employees are not currently mandated in New York State, start there.)
Fairly good points, but I believe there are several important difference:
1) The PPD is not a vaccine. True, it probably isn't the best thing to have jabbed into your body every 6 months or so, but it does not contain live or inactive viruses. Further, TB is a far stretch from influenza. It is high contagious (airborne), very dangerous, and requires months of medical treatment. The PPD is also pretty well-researched and high effective (although it does create some false positives).
2) Hep B is scary, scary disease that is highly infections and poses a great risk to health care professionals. The Hep-B vaccine contains proteins, and no virus particles. The vaccine is well-researched and over 95 percent effective. Basically, the benefits greatly outweigh the risks.
3, 4, 5) These are mandated to everyone, not just nurses. They are well-researched (even though they have recently been called into controversy) and they are highly effective. Again, the benefits outweigh the risks. Plus, you don't need another vaccine for employment, I can just show a titer, so it's really not the same issue. I'm sure they could develop a titer for H1N1. If they do, I'll be glad to have my blood drawn to show immunity.
6) This has nothing to do with anything. Peeing in a cup isn't the same as having a mandatory chemical/virus compound jabbed into your body, or shot up your nose.
"Is it too much to ask that you protect yourself, and your patients from getting a highly preventable virus?" Read the CDC website closely, the flu vaccine only works with "well-matched" strains. NJ mandated the flu vaccine in children last year (IMO, the worst political decision I've even seen while living in this state). What was the result? We had the second-fastest spreading influenza rate among children in the US...
"
It has made me feel sick every time, but I've gotten it, because it's what they ask of me."
Why? This is not 1910. The employer shouldn't be giving you an ultimatum to go into to the coal mine or quit when Johnson is coughing up soot and the canary has been dead since Tuesday. We have the right to work in a safe environment, which I don't suspect includes subjecting people to unnecessary, un-researched vaccines.
Fairly good points, but I believe there are several important difference:
2) Hep B is scary, scary disease that is highly infections and poses a great risk to health care professionals. The Hep-B vaccine contains proteins, and no virus particles. The vaccine is well-researched and over 95 percent effective. Basically, the benefits greatly outweigh the risks.
.
You may be to young to remember this but there were a GREAT many paranoid rumors going around when the Hepatitis vaccine first came out. I went to my infection control instructor from nursing school(25 years ago) and she recommended getting it, so I did. One of the things people said to me was "you are going to get AIDS from it!". You don't know what being upset is until you had someone scream that at you. I am very glad I did get it at the time. You see the original Hepavax keeps peoples titers high for a LONG time. I have had no problems with low titers like people who got the later version of the vaccine. PS I have never had hepatitis either.
Even though if I remember correctly it only was against B.
seriously, what is the big deal? i live in ny, and fyi, it is new york state, not nyc that is mandating the flu shot, so get your facts straight.
you are already mandated to:
1) have a negative ppd
2) either have the hep b vaccine, have a positive titer, or sign a statement basically saying it's on you if you get hep b.
3) have a positive measles titer
4) have a positive rubella titer
5) have a positive mumps titer
6) have a negative drug screen...
in order to work in a healthcare facility
is having a mandatory flu shot really that much more to ask? you are in a position to work very closely to some of the most vulnerable members of the community. is it too much to ask that you protect yourself, and your patients from getting a highly preventable virus? i personally have gotten the flu shot every year that my employer has offered it to me. it has made me feel sick every time, but i've gotten it, because it's what they ask of me.
they also ask me to park in a certain place, and i do that. it's called a condition of employment. if i don't like it, i can go work someplace else.
(hint: nursing home employees are not currently mandated in new york state, start there.)
I agree a politician shouldn't decide for me what kind of shots I get. But at the same time, mandatory shots are a part of the nursing profession. Who here flinched when they were asked for proof of their MMR vaccination? We expect some vaccinations to be mandatory. Is it just that H1N1 is so new that we're resisting the vaccine?
I agree a politician shouldn't decide for me what kind of shots I get. But at the same time, mandatory shots are a part of the nursing profession. Who here flinched when they were asked for proof of their MMR vaccination? We expect some vaccinations to be mandatory. Is it just that H1N1 is so new that we're resisting the vaccine?
MMR and the other "mandatory" vaccines are mandatory for all.
H1N1 is a brand new, minimally tested vaccine with unknown risks. The flu vaccine is "best guess". They are not comparable.
You may be to young to remember this but there were a GREAT many paranoid rumors going around when the Hepatitis vaccine first came out. I went to my infection control instructor from nursing school(25 years ago) and she recommended getting it, so I did. One of the things people said to me was "you are going to get AIDS from it!". You don't know what being upset is until you had someone scream that at you. I am very glad I did get it at the time. You see the original Hepavax keeps peoples titers high for a LONG time. I have had no problems with low titers like people who got the later version of the vaccine. PS I have never had hepatitis either.
Even though if I remember correctly it only was against B.
I know a PhD nurse who believes that a great number of HIV cases were brought to the US in the late 70's and early 80's through tainted Hep-B vaccines. From what I understand, the older vaccine used attenuated viruses and other blood product contaminants. Apparently, much of the Hep-B testing was done if Africa because of the high incidence of Hep-B over there, and the vaccines were created using blood and viral specimens from that area. Not saying I believe that, but it's a theory. However, the newly mandated Hep-B vaccine only uses protein and it safe. I got it when it was only "recommended" when I was a teenage. Even then they didn't mandate a Hepatitis B vaccine!
Mandatory medical experimentation is a condition of employment? It's a little hard to "go somewhere else" when the entire state puts forth a mandate, no? I suppose we could all quit and work for McDonalds. I'm astonished that so many people are okay with the idea of the government or an employer giving them an ultimatum: allow our experimental vaccine to be injected/snorted into your body or give up your livelihood.
Specializes in PICU, NICU, L&D, Public Health, Hospice.
to answer the question about allergic reactions to vaccines...if a person has an allergic response to the vaccine, that vaccine is not given again. Period. There is a difference, however, to a local response to the injection and an allergic reaction.
:yeah:
Virgo_RN, BSN, RN
3,543 Posts
It's really not a big deal to me. I'd rather get the flu shot than be responsible for killing somebody's Grandma or preemie baby because I didn't want to be told what to do.