Forced Flu Shots

[Inkachu]

So we're in the midst of a pretty rough flu season right now. The current strain is especially virulent, and the flu shot this season is not as highly effective (less than 50%) as usual.

I work for the state health department, and while flu shots are always encouraged for all staff, we suddenly received an email yesterday telling us that all staff must be immunized immediately, or begin wearing a face mask while at work.

I've already had my flu shot, so I'm not bothered, but plenty of other staff don't normally get flu shots (personal reasons, mostly) and they're all in a tizzie over this.

What do you guys think about this? Does the health department have the right to force its employees to be immunized against the flu (or any other disease that it deems is a risk - we have to be immunized against several things)?

Where do you draw the line between respecting an individual's privacy and protecting the health of the community?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

I received 24 flu shots, one for each year of active military duty and had little say in the matter as it was part of the job.

“Individuals” privacy has it limits, like when it reintroduced measles to the United States.

 

[Inkachu]

Thanks for your response, Aryeh.

 

[Inkfingers]

Does the health department have the right to force its employees to be immunized against the flu?

Strange.

I thought that your government believed a woman has right of control over her own body. That's what they always say when excusing abortion...

Or in other words no they do not have the right to force this upon you, and it is a deeply creepy move.

 

[Inkachu]

Strange.

I thought that your government believed a woman has right of control over her own body. That's what they always say when excusing abortion...

Or in other words no they do not have the right to force this upon you, and it is a deeply creepy move.

The rules are slightly different when you're dealing with community health, and employees who are directly in contact with vast numbers of the public, especially those most vulnerable to disease, and most likely to carry disease themselves. We're similar to hospital employees in that sense. Most hospitals require their employees to be vaccinated against things like hepatitis and tetanus, and to receive regular tuberculosis screenings. Would you consider those "creepy" moves as well?

The state cannot physically force anyone to do anything. However, there can be serious implications, like putting your job security on the line, if you don't comply. In this instance, with the flu shots, the alternative is to wear a mask at work. Obviously, nobody wants to do that, it would look ridiculous and suspicious and they'd constantly be having to explain themselves to their clients and patients. I think it's a slimy, juvenile tactic, personally. I think it's fine to "strongly urge" everyone to get vaccinated, but unless there's a valid reason to think an employee is putting people at risk (ie, if they come to work with a fever and cough), I think the line should be drawn at "strongly urging".

I do think it's a slightly different scenario if you're working with people who are seriously ill or immune compromised, like in a hospital setting. We don't see many people like that around here, though.

 

[selfinflikted]

I can't understand why anyone wouldn't want their yearly flu vax any way. I mean, if you've ever actually HAD the flu, you'd do almost anything to never have to go through that again, including taking an immunization with a weak efficacy. I had mine, and ANY help against potentially getting the flu again is extremely welcome in my book.

I don't think having an option to wear a mask rather than get vaccinated is actually "forcing" vaccinations. I mean, there is another option here - a mask. So, yea.

 

[selfinflikted]

I think it's fine to "strongly urge" everyone to get vaccinated, but unless there's a valid reason to think an employee is putting people at risk (ie, if they come to work with a fever and cough), I think the line should be drawn at "strongly urging".
.

I'm sure you realize that, being a healthcare worker and all, the flu can affect people differently. Some people can carry the virus and be almost asymptomatic. So you can't use "unless they are coming in to work with a fever" as an out for this. The flu can be spread by asymptomatic people, can it not?

Personally, I think the fact that people you work with have a much higher risk of coming in contact with the virus in and of itself IS a valid reason to think an employee is putting people at risk.

 

[DaisyDay]

They weren't actually "forced" to get the flu shot since they were also given the option of wearing a face mask.

 

[bhsmte]

So we're in the midst of a pretty rough flu season right now. The current strain is especially virulent, and the flu shot this season is not as highly effective (less than 50%) as usual.

I work for the state health department, and while flu shots are always encouraged for all staff, we suddenly received an email yesterday telling us that all staff must be immunized immediately, or begin wearing a face mask while at work.

I've already had my flu shot, so I'm not bothered, but plenty of other staff don't normally get flu shots (personal reasons, mostly) and they're all in a tizzie over this.

What do you guys think about this? Does the health department have the right to force its employees to be immunized against the flu (or any other disease that it deems is a risk - we have to be immunized against several things)?

Where do you draw the line between respecting an individual's privacy and protecting the health of the community?

I am aware of several hospitals in my area, that have done the same. Get the flu shot, or wear a mask. If you don't wear a mask, you are no longer employed.

Clearly, they wouldn't be enforcing this, if their attorneys did not feel they had the legal grounds to do so.

Since this is relatively new, it certainly could be challenged legally and I would imagine, the healthcare providers forcing the shots, would have to show the undue risk that is being placed on others if a mask is not worn, if they choose to not receive the shot.

 

[Inkfingers]

The rules are slightly different when you're dealing with community health, and employees who are directly in contact with vast numbers of the public, especially those most vulnerable to disease, and most likely to carry disease themselves.

That's a very dangerous standard - it could be used as an excuse for making everyone have flu injections in case they meet elderly people or those with AIDS.

 

[FireDragon76]

I got sick this week, miserable.. I went to the Little Vietnam area of Orlando and got some herbal medicine to take. It helps some but I still feel like crap. But the crazy thing was I had a flu shot, and I still got sick. Really bad. I had shivering, coughing, it's no fun.

As I get older, getting sick takes its toll and its less and less pleasant, so I don't see what kind of sane person would avoid a flu shot, unless there were real medical reasons.

 

[Cute Tink]

I don't see what kind of sane person would avoid a flu shot, unless there were real medical reasons.

I can't understand why anyone wouldn't want their yearly flu vax any way. I mean, if you've ever actually HAD the flu, you'd do almost anything to never have to go through that again, including taking an immunization with a weak efficacy.

As a person who is sane (up for debate I guess) and who declines to get a flu shot, let me provide a little insight to why:

1. I never seem to get the flu and I've been around people who have;
2. I have seen people who get the flu shot religiously get really sick anyway.

So that's why I don't. Feel free to debate my sanity if you wish.

What do you guys think about this? Does the health department have the right to force its employees to be immunized against the flu (or any other disease that it deems is a risk - we have to be immunized against several things)?

Where do you draw the line between respecting an individual's privacy and protecting the health of the community?

Since you work with a population that comes to you when sick or for other health reasons (I'm making an assumption here), I would say that it's fair that employees be held to a somewhat different standard when it comes to being immunized.

However, you also have the choice of wearing a mask, which I have seen plenty of people do and could easily be explained away if a patient questions it.

 

[Inkachu]

I'm sure you realize that, being a healthcare worker and all, the flu can affect people differently. Some people can carry the virus and be almost asymptomatic. So you can't use "unless they are coming in to work with a fever" as an out for this. The flu can be spread by asymptomatic people, can it not?

Personally, I think the fact that people you work with have a much higher risk of coming in contact with the virus in and of itself IS a valid reason to think an employee is putting people at risk.

True, but by if we take that thought and run with it, suddenly every person, everywhere, becomes a "potential carrier" and we're all in a panic. At some point we have to assume a reasonable risk as we go about our lives, you know?

And you're right, and that's why we're "strongly urged" to get a flu shot every year. We have mass community clinics where shots are free, any employee can get one anytime, no charge. MOST people do get them, but there's always a few...

 

[Inkachu]

That's a very dangerous standard - it could be used as an excuse for making everyone have flu injections in case they meet elderly people or those with AIDS.

Stay tuned...

 

[Inkachu]

As a person who is sane (up for debate I guess) and who declines to get a flu shot, let me provide a little insight to why:

1. I never seem to get the flu and I've been around people who have;
2. I have seen people who get the flu shot religiously get really sick anyway.

So that's why I don't. Feel free to debate my sanity if you wish.

I don't debate your sanity at all. There are people out there who, for whatever reason, seem to have superhero-type immune systems and just never get sick. My only beef comes in where people start saying that vaccines are government poison, or that they got the flu from the shot itself, which is a bunch of nonsense. No vaccination is 100% effective, so it's possible to get the shot and still get the flu. However, most people who get sick after a flu shot have something other than the flu OR they already had the flu but weren't showing symptoms at the time they got the shot OR were exposed soon after, and it was too late to be effective. You need a good 2 weeks to build immunity after a flu shot, so if you run into someone with the flu a day later, you can still get sick.

Since you work with a population that comes to you when sick or for other health reasons (I'm making an assumption here), I would say that it's fair that employees be held to a somewhat different standard when it comes to being immunized.

Yep.

However, you also have the choice of wearing a mask, which I have seen plenty of people do and could easily be explained away if a patient questions it.

Right. I think the aversion stems from looking ridiculous (it's mostly women here, and you know, they need to look good lol), it would be uncomfortable, and talking with a mask on is a challenge, and we have to talk all day long, including on the phone, which would present a dilemma. Also, for people with breathing issues, like asthma, having a mask on for hours and hours can be downright dangerous. I have asthma, and I've had to wear masks for various things before, and it can make breathing really difficult.

 

[Inkachu]

Also, as I said in the OP, this year's flu strain is especially virulent, and is killing more people than normal, which is undoubtedly causing the higher-up's to crack down a bit more. This is the first year since I've been working for the health department (since 2004) that this mandate has been issued.

 

[selfinflikted]

As a person who is sane (up for debate I guess) and who declines to get a flu shot, let me provide a little insight to why:

1. I never seem to get the flu and I've been around people who have;
2. I have seen people who get the flu shot religiously get really sick anyway.

So that's why I don't. Feel free to debate my sanity if you wish.

I think you can be asymptomatic and still spread the virus to others.

 

[Cute Tink]

I don't debate your sanity at all. There are people out there who, for whatever reason, seem to have superhero-type immune systems and just never get sick.

I wouldn't go that far, but I do rarely get sick. I went through a recent episode where both my kids were sick at separate times and so was my ex (that bad cold that went around for a while) and I got the sniffles for a couple days.

My only beef comes in where people start saying that vaccines are government poison, or that they got the flu from the shot itself, which is a bunch of nonsense.

I have no problems in general with vaccines. Both my children are properly vaccinated. I just don't bother with the flu shot.

I think you can be asymptomatic and still spread the virus to others.

I'm sure, but people aren't exactly getting the flu all the time around me. It's just that in the rare case that they have, I am unaffected.

 

[Inkachu]

I'm such a sickly person in general that the flu doesn't really scare me lol. I got my shot religiously till 2007 then just decided to skip it, and didn't get it again until last year. I got the flu in 2012, but it wasn't horrible. Then this year, both my husband and son got the flu (they didn't have their shots) and I was spared, thankfully. So it's both a bit of a crap shoot, and something each person needs to decide for themselves. Not everyone is terrified of the flu.

 

[selfinflikted]

It's just that in the rare case that they have, I am unaffected.

So if you were a potential cause of someone getting sick, why wouldn't you just get your shot and spare them the potential misery?