All frontline NHS to be double jabbed to keep a job

We cannot override medical ethics and the law on this. thats my point and the ethical and legal position is very difficult

I have tired to explain why compulsory or coerced vaccinations are illegal and unethical and some of the reasoning behind this

Except in the Westminster system you are proven quite wrong.

By enacting emergency legislation which allows for exactly these sorts of decisions to be made, we’ve saved many thousands of lives… And no “slippery slope defence” mitigates against that.

The application of human rights and discrimination law often involves balancing the rights and interests of different people.

Your argument regarding consent in this case is entirely contrary to that of arguing for social equity in another thread, IIRC. The overall safety of the community far outweighs issues of bodily autonomy. As you certainly know, there are different requirements for informed consent depending on the procedure. This is not a transvaginal ultrasound or a complex surgery.

No one is forcing them. They are free to leave.

Timely news- San Francisco introduced a vaccine mandate for police. Police union and news said that 30% of all officers might quit, causing a crisis as hundreds of officers leave. As of today, there are just 39 who’ve refused. Yesterday there were 40 but one of them just died of covid.

Interesting aside- in the same force, 260 applications for religious exemption were apparently dismissed as being fraudulent. I wonder how many of the 40 39 who’re suspended are in that group- ie police officers that just got caught lying or fabricating evidence to try and get out of a jam?

The overall safety of the community far outweighs issues of bodily autonomy.

Really? A very difficult argument to prove. Used in Typhoid carriers and TB carriers but never otherwise

want to show your reasoning? You would have to show that the potential harm to the population is worth the restrictions on liberty

informed consent is an absolute in all occasions

My arguement on this is entirely cosistent with my positions elsewhere aand informed by study to a high level, reading the relevant documantation much thought and 40 years experience.

I know its hard to understand why what on the face of it looks like a simple and obvious solution but when you look below the surface its much more complex and has a lot of secondary effects

(part of) the BMA position

“However, as we argued ahead of today’s announcement, there is an important distinction between believing every healthcare worker should be vaccinated and advocating mandatory vaccinations for all NHS staff. Doing this comes with its own practical and also ethical implications – such as the right for anyone to make their own private healthcare decisions – and we hope that as Government progresses with plans to make the Covid jab compulsory for NHS staff, these are carefully considered and taken into account.”

https://www.bma.org.uk/bma-media-centre/delay-in-making-covid-vaccine-mandatory-is-sensible-ahead-of-winter-pressures-says-bma

also this

“Mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is an incredibly complex issue that raises many ethical, legal and practical questions. Therefore, it is only right that any Government proposals are put out to a proper consultation, during which time staff and representatives are given an opportunity to contribute.

https://www.bma.org.uk/bma-media-centre/mandatory-vaccination-for-nhs-staff-is-incredibly-complex-issue-says-bma

This is worth a read as well

https://www.bma.org.uk/bma-media-centre/legal-ethical-and-practical-implications-must-be-considered-ahead-of-mandating-vaccines-says-bma

I am not just making this stuff up – its central to medical ethics and the BMa and others are very concerned about this

Yes, they’re legal arguments. We’ve potentially set a precedent and the Queensland Human Rights Commission has backed it. Time will tell whether it will be challenged. Bit in five years time I expect it will be considered irrelevant and the UK will still be considered to have been a Covid basket case.

tj – nobody is really saying there aren’t legal and ethical issues, but the BMA statement is somewhat more tempered in its tone than your claims. “…an incredibly complex issue that raises many ethical, legal and practical questions…” v’s “…against all law and ethics…”, “…would automatically be unfair dismissal…”, “…the person doing the vaccination would be guilty of assault…”

Its not just legal arguments – its moral and ethical and sometimes that tops the law

It will not be seen as irrelevant in five years time – it will be in all the ethics textbooks for lessons around compulsory or coerced medication

UK will still be seen as a covid basket case for sure

of course the BMA is more tempered. they don’t want to upset the government

Many folk on this thread have completely ignored the ethical and moral issues or dismissed them

If someone gives a medication without proper consent then yes =- that is assult

Disagreeing with you or believing that you’re exaggerating the case doesn’t equate to ignoring your point of view.

I’m a strong believer in the importance of ethics, but it’s not black and white. There’s a point where action must prevail.
I’ve just been talking to a senior nurse that said she’d really rather have not taken a vaccine, doesn’t normally have the flu vaccine, etc, etc, but bowed to the inevitable. Tough. But she recognised on balance it’s a good decision.

Really? A very difficult argument to prove. Used in Typhoid carriers and TB carriers but never otherwise

want to show your reasoning? You would have to show that the potential harm to the population is worth the restrictions on liberty

How important is your liberty though? You are already not completely free, you subscribe to loads of rules about what you can and can’t do. This is called the social contract. Your liberty exists within certain constraints, and you aren’t free to pick and choose. Many many rules exist to protect people from themselves and others from their potentially damaging actions. What’s the difference here?

Would you rather be treated by a highly skilled, highly dedicated, highly experienced nurse who is unvaccinated but has Covid antibodies in their system, and therefore no different to a vaccinated nurse

I’d rather not be treated by a belligerent moron regardless of how ‘dedicated’ they happened to be. I would think, and I would sincerely hope, that the number of anti-vax “healthcare professionals” were vanishingly small and the ones that are I wouldn’t want anywhere near me regardless of what antibodies they may or may not have.

its moral and ethical and sometimes that tops the law

Does it? When? Can you cite us a court case which has been thrown out on the grounds of “well, we don’t like it”?

You’ve been wanging on for several pages now about morals and ethics and consent and coercion but it’s nonsense. The law generally hangs on “what did we do last time?” and morals don’t come into it, more’s the pity.

Requiring (say) a nurse to take basic steps to protect themselves and their vulnerable patients shouldn’t be a great leap, any more than mandating helmets on a building site. People don’t get admitted to hospital because they’re really healthy. Would you think it reasonable for a surgeon not to wear scrubs because they believed it was an infringement of their human rights to be coerced into putting gloves on?

Because, you know what, I’m bored of this anti-vax apologist rhetoric now (not directed at you TJ but just generally), because it just shouldn’t be a discussion in the modern world. If it were some revolutionary new weird procedure then I’d be arguing with the best of them, but it’s 200-year old proven science and it boils down to a pinprick in your arm vs potentially infecting and killing people you love. The answer to “ooh but we don’t know about long-term effects” is “yes we do,” we have a metric fuckton of data going back to Jenner in the 1700s. It is a ridiculous argument.

You can’t scream about your right to choice and then whine when everyone else is also choosing. Someone doesn’t want a vaccination, fine. I don’t want those people anywhere near me touching things I’m touching and breathing the same air, is that not equally fine? Where are my “moral and ethical” rights not to be interacting with wilful plague rats?

I’ve just been talking to a senior nurse [who] recognised on balance it’s a good decision.

On balance? The counterargument from a senior healthcare professional being what?

Erm, sarcasm font wasn’t working there. She claims she’d like more testing to have been done on the vaccines first.

@cougar your point re. Surgeons does have relevance. There was at least one surgeon fired (US I think) for not maintaining appropriate hygiene standards.

Erm, sarcasm font wasn’t working there.

Ah. Text, sorry.

She claims she’d like more testing to have been done on the vaccines first.

1) They’ve been subject to the same testing as any other medicinal product. It’s faster to market because more people have been working on it due to it being an emergency response, not because corners have been cut. If two people dig a hole in half the time it’d take one person, is it any less of a hole?

2) We know how vaccines work, we’ve been doing this for a long time now.

3) We shouldn’t be having to explain any of this to a “senior nurse.” I find that scarier than any vaccine.

Does it? When?

Lots of examples from history

How about the suffragettes? Or how about the recent court case with folk glueing themselves onto airplanes to stop deportations – found not guilty despite the obvious act against the law because the jury bought the moral argument

You’ve been wanging on for several pages now about morals and ethics and consent and coercion but it’s nonsense

Really? then why do all healthcare workers have to obey a code of ethics then? sometimes this code of ethics requires you to act outside the law.

I’ll give you one example Cannabis users ( for symptom control) in hospitals. Our code of conduct duty to protect their privacy outweighs our duty to report a crime – and that has actually been backed in court. So reporting a crime would get us into serious trouble with our regulatory bodies

I have personally seen this 3 times and also read the legal stuff around it.

… 4) How much testing has been done on Covid? Which would she prefer?

I’ll give you another one cougar. giving girls under 16 contraceptives. Its illegal for them to be having sex but healthcare workers still given them contraception and do not report the lawbreaking

thats our ethical code trumping the law

How about the suffragettes?

Dude, that was 120 years ago.

found not guilty despite the obvious act against the law

Which law were they breaking?

—

Really? then why do all healthcare workers have to obey a code of ethics then?

Because the idea of unethical healthcare is somewhat scary.

sometimes this code of ethics requires you to act outside the law.

How? When did you last break the law in pursuit of your career?

I wholly agree with you that ethics should trump the law, where I’m tripping up on is the notion that it actually does. As a deliberately emotive example, why do people have to fly to the continent to employ the services of Dignitas? We treat animals better than that.

Cannabis users ( for symptom control) in hospitals. Our code of conduct duty to protect their privacy outweighs our duty to report a crime

You’re not breaking the law there though, are you. Unless you’re rocking up to work with a bag of joints? This is far from my sphere of knowledge and a huge can of thread derailment worms that I don’t reallywant to open but AFAIK, CBD was legal now.

I’ll give you another one cougar. giving girls under 16 contraceptives. Its illegal for them to be having sex but healthcare workers still given them contraception and do not report the lawbreaking

thats our ethical code trumping the law

Again, no it isn’t. You haven’t broken any laws, these aren’t mutually exclusive. You don’t even know that an offense has been / is going to be committed, they could be asking for contraception to boast to their mates.

Kinda curious though, where the line is here. Totally with you in giving 15-year olds contraception without question but is “under 16” a catch-all? How would you deal with a 12-year old wanting birth control? An 8-year old asking for condoms? Genuine question, it sounds like a minefield.

But it’s not as straightforward as you are stating @tjagain – I have been involved in mass programme of vaccination where by what you have written >75% of trust staff were coerced into flu vaccines by offer of extra annual leave as higher uptake meant greater winter pressures money for trust. It nearly broke us in occ health as we had significant increased uptake, and as usual no warning from the trust it was coming.
Should I self-report to the NMC?
By what you have written I’ve not given vaccines under informed consent due to coercion. Anyone coming to me, raising their sleeve and offering their arm for jab is consenting to a vaccine – as someone wrote above, I don’t know the back story just they are presenting to me for vaccination.
I’m non-NHS now and conflicted about mandatory covid jabs, but like EPP workers needing regular bloods or evidence of vaccinations to maintain status to work, such as surgeons and dialysis nurses, there are some roles it can be mandated, and even grandfather rights can expire therefore contracts/ roles can change without new contract being issued.

>75% of trust staff were coerced into flu vaccines by offer of extra annual leave

Sounds like the word you’re looking for there is “rewarded.”

Is the uptick in work, albeit seemingly badly signposted / prepared for, for vaccination not offset by a downfall in poorly people? Again, genuine question, I’m not arguing: however badly handled it may have been by the trust, how does a surprise flu vaccination programme balance against treating influenza-infected patients?

Regarding informed consent for adolescents there is Gillick Competence (named for a legal precedent) and Fraser guidelines (contraception specific).
I’ve helped developed specific health procedures relating to these to guide staff. Essentially, the clinician is able to assess the decision making competence of a 12+ year old.

In Tj’s examples above there were balanced judgements made about the greater good, it’s far too simplistic to say ethics trumps law. Precisely what is suggested from mass vaccination and mandatory vaccination.

@cougar – from my poor recall, the evidence at that time showed limited benefit to individuals /workforce / organisation from having vaccine, however increased winter pressure money significantly beneficial to organisation.
You could be right in your definition of it being a benefit, and is certainly how I would try to persuade the non-enthusiastic, it benefits them/ their family having it, as well as patients. There was robust discussion at the time about the method used to promote uptake, especially around nervous neighbouring trusts.

Thank you.

But any “limited benefit” is still a net benefit, right?

The objective of (well telegraphed) vaccine mandates is to increase vaccine uptake.

The later step of excluding the unvaccinated from frontline or high risk environment is only a secondary benefit, which may be extended, watered down etc, depending on the observed impact. They are not about to lay-off 10,000 nurses over this.

But to (I think) Northwind and Reeksy’s previous points – it won’t be 10,000 nurses. Anti-vaxxers and their apologists are continuing to consume a disproportionate amount of oxygen – and the number within the NHS will be even fewer. My concern is the care home sector, where a greater proportion of antivaxxers might be lurking.

I would be concerned that a Dr/Nurse treating me had refused the vaccine…. more as an indication of their poor judgement than anything else.

lamp
Free Member
the majority of NHS staff understand the argument that the vaccine is still in trial phase until 2023 and with that brings a degree of unknown risk that they don’t feel prepared to take.

So we’re just making shit up now?

Majority means “more than half” BTW. More than half of all NHS staff are wrong about this basic information, widely publicized and easily checkable? And on this basis are refusing the vaccine? Yeah, nah.

For the record, if anyone tells you this in future (or perhaps you are tempted to believe it yourself?), you/they can be reassured that trials of all the vaccines are ongoing, and will be for years to come. However, the threshold for evidence needed to grant a license has been passed – and (obviously?) we don’t just stop gathering information at that point.

My concern is the care home sector, where a greater proportion of antivaxxers might be lurking

Your timing is impeccable. As of 1h 45mins ago, Queensland extended the mandate “for all private healthcare staff across the state, including staff working in hospitals, aged care and disability services.” Required by 15 December.

“The Direction extends to health professionals, contractors, independent third party providers, and employees or volunteers engaged by external agencies.

It applies to a vast range of healthcare settings including private hospitals, day surgeries, GP clinics, pharmacies, optometrists, private nurse offices, allied health clinics, dental surgeries, and private pathology centres.

The Direction also applies to in-home aged care, many disability support services, and not-for-profit and NGOs providing public healthcare services.”

Your timing is impeccable

I’m usually a day late and a dollar short.

A NSW Paramedic (who was also the deputy mayor of some regional town) has just had his case against the vaccine mandate chucked-out of the supreme court. However, not directly relevant to TJs arguments as his technical objection was on “religious” grounds – which was found to be nonsense.

The case comes after another judge last month dismissed two other cases challenging the validity of the NSW vaccination mandates for certain workers.

One involved 10 plaintiffs from various industries, including health, aged care, construction and education, who all argued their employment had been impacted by the health orders.

Justice Robert Beech-Jones ruled all their grounds had failed and said the orders were aimed exclusively at public safety.

Nurse in a semi rural MIU here, and I think we are all doubled jabbed if not boostered up too. Probably has a lot to do with the demographic of the area. I think most of us know of the odd individual in the local health community that are constantly posting antivax nonsense on Facebook etc, and might just be our local cranks but most seem to have issues with ‘the sauce’ too 😵 not sure I would normally have been so quick to go for a rushed out vaccination, but my daughter has bad asthma and dying whilst reaching for breath has always been a bit of a fear of mine. I generally think getting it is better for patients and colleagues, so I don’t have an issue with the plans.

Same here in Oz. Nov 1 was the “cut off”.

We are already massively short staffed here. We are not getting staff from interstate or abroad.
I get the logic behind getting all staff double vaxxed. I have a certificate confirming I’m double vaxxed. But now they are saying we will need ongoing booster jabs every six months. Any sending people home wo decline the jabs isn’t going to help with stress levels of an already overworked and understaffed health system.

The expectation that here in WA it’s “close” to kicking off (zero cases in WA as of now). But it’s creeping closer – cases increasing in NT and SA.

The feeling of impending doom is strong. I had an email saying my laptop has been designated as a “covid” laptop, whatever that means. And our nursing union sent out 2 face masks with our union magazine last week.

The expectation that here in WA it’s “close” to kicking off (zero cases in WA as of now). But it’s creeping closer – cases increasing in NT and SA.

The feeling of impending doom is strong.

Yeah – nothing drives vaccine uptake like an outbreak of Delta. Certainly in NSW there was a lot of initial vaccine hesitancy driven by the feeling that there was more risk associated with the vaccine (the AZ one in particular), than catching covid. Can’t really blame people when numbers were so low, and it was 10 months since the last death at one point.

However – you think the healthcare sector is at breaking point now, wait until the ICUs fill-up with unvaccinated covid patients, and staffing numbers are down because of covid-related absence.

Fair play to WA for managing the border so closely – just over 1,000 cases and 9 deaths since the start. But the time to pivot strategy was a few months ago, WA are at risk of getting left behind, or worse: vulnerable to an inevitable delta outbreak

We shouldn’t be having to explain any of this to a “senior nurse.” I find that scarier than any vaccine.

Supporting Covid/antivax bollocks should be a disciplinary offence for a healthcare worker. Seriously.

Don’t recall TJ getting quite this het up for the care home staff, whose deadline is next week to get jabbed or move post.

I’m pro vaccine but I’m also pro choice. I question the choice of those who decide not to, but that isn’t as concerning as a government who think it’s okay to mandate such things. Where is the line?

I would love to be a pilot but the pesky government have mandated that I need to have good colour vision. How dare they remove my choice?

There are literally thousands of jobs where there are rules in place requiring good health, licenses, qualifications and training. Your choice is whether or not you want to do that job.

Same applies to care home staff – I think the coercing of people under such a threat is morally wrong. the threat is severe – lose your job, your rights to work in that profession, no rights to benefits for a period of time as you have been sacked, huge financial penalty

There is also research quoted by the BMA in one of the links above that suggests it could actually be counterproductive

Also in the two examples I gave above: all citizens have a duty to report a crime. In both of those examples a crime is being committed, however a healthcare professionals duty of confidentiality trumps the legal requirement to report a crime. ( assuming non coercive / abusive in the case of the underage girls or just simple consumption for the cannabis user)

I find it astonishing how many of yo are simply prepared to watch this happen.

@franksinatra, and many other medical stipulations.

If the vaccine mandate was in place before they took employment its of no issues – its retrospectively changing the rules where the problem lies and also coercing people into taking invasive medical treatments

I have never seen coercive measures used in medicine for competent people before.

Should all hospitality workers and shop workers be compulsory vaccinated? How about transport staff? Police?

The premise of your question is why should health and social care staff be subject to different rules. I think the answer to that is bloody obvious. Hospitals and care homes are rammed full of clinically vulnerable people. Staff are working in close proximity to them for extended periods of time. The risk to all in these settings is much, much higher than in hospitality and shops. Hospitals are not healthy places to be for staff or patients so everyone has a responsibility to reduce risk. Further to that, these services can ill afford to have large cohorts of staff off for extended periods through getting ill or isolated / awaiting test results.

There is also a public health responsibility as frontline staff should be exemplars of good practice. The problem with anti-vaccers is that they are like open water swimmers. You know about them because they tell everyone about it, a lot. In a public health context these people have influence. They have responsibility and they certainly have choice about where they work.

If the vaccine mandate was in place before they took employment its of no issues – its retrospectively changing the rules where the problem lies and also coercing people into taking invasive medical treatments

That is a weak argument, COVID 19 and its vaccine did not exist before last year so it couldn’t be mandated as a condition at the point of employment. If a new strain of ebola suddenly rampaged through the UK and they bought out a vaccine, would you say staff should not be required to have it because they had already started their employment?

I think you union militancy is blinkering your normal informed, medical and grown up common sense.