Western Australia bans unvaccinated parents from visiting their sick children in hospitals

Elaine1 I fear that could happen (is happening) but hope that, by the time it does spread in Australia, as it surely will, it will be a much milder variant.

Not just the state of WA, the whole of Australia

If people complaining about illiberality had a grandchild in hospital (particularly a clinically vulnerable grandchild) would they be happy to have unvaccinated visitors around them?

The parents - if they have been tested before going in and/or had had Covid and recovered - are not just any visitors.

It is certainly complex. Few of us would say that JWs who refuse blood donations for their children, when it could have their lives, are free and fair to do so.

What about Measles vaccination- a big come back of Measles due to so many children un-vaccinated- are the parents responsible when children can seriously sick?

my siblings in WA say that covid is already in the community and talk is that real numbers are being witheld. Their vaccination levels are not brilliant and they have no herd immunity as we have in the uk. Right from the beginning, they were fed media information that was sneering at the uk and covid, now they are pretty scared. One sister, medic, says that their health service cannot cope even pre-covid

WA has a tinpot dictatorship and I am with the OP, keeping unvaccinated parents from children is downright cruel

This is not about children being vaccinated - it's about children being taken into hospital fr whatever reason and unvaccinated parents being banned from visiting them.

Surely, unvaccinated parents would be having a change of mind - and getting their vaccines pdq - if they had a child in hospital.

Hospitals have a duty of care to keep their patients safe. So many in the UK have caught Covid in hospital - and died. I'm all in favour of all staff and visitors being required to be vaccinated.

Callistemon21

^If people complaining about illiberality had a grandchild in hospital (particularly a clinically vulnerable grandchild) would they be happy to have unvaccinated visitors around them?^

The parents - if they have been tested before going in and/or had had Covid and recovered - are not just any visitors.

I know, and it’s a difficult situation, although to others in the ward they are just ‘any visitors’. My feelings are based on how I felt when my own baby was put at risk by an unvaccinated person, and much as I understand the civil rights issue, that is difficult to shake off.

An unvisited child will, I hope, get better and go home to her parents - a child who dies as a result of contact with an unvaccinated visitor won’t.

But how many children in WA would actually die even if they got covid? I think someone came up with a figure on here a few months back that in the whole of the UK deaths amongst the under 12s with covid, I assume omicron, were negligible.
Though, of course, one child's death is one too many.

I suppose that depends on whether they were vulnerable in the first place, like the babies on the SCU when my son was born.

Your case sounds distressing Doodledog especially with such a tiny infant.

In 2020 before vaccines and people weren't allowed to visit patients at all, does anyone know what the ruling was here in the UK for parents of young children in hospital?

And as the transmission rates are much poorer for AZ than Pfizer from what I understand I assume those who have had the AZ vaccine should also be banned.

Once the borders are opened, which they will be, unfortunately they will go through the pain we have gone through.

The only difference is that a fair few of the population will have been jabbed

People will have to learn to live with CV19 ?

There’s a big difference though actually isn’t there? They have a slightly higher percentage of the population fully vaccinated than the UK, and 32% have had the booster to date. They have missed Alpha and Delta, so if they do now get large numbers they are more likely to get Omicron which is less serious, but no indication yet that that is happening imminently. And only 9 deaths to date, with two years of freedom to live normally that we haven’t had.

If your child is rushed into hospital as an emergency and you are unvaccinated it would be impossible to suddenly be fully vaccinated in order to visit them as it takes many weeks.

A negative test should be sufficient or proof of antibodies.

And some people are unable to have vaccinations, are they barred as well. I think the legal cases will be interesting.

I agree GrannyGravy13, it’s the same issue as has been argued many times over on Gransnet as unvaccinated healthcare workers, there has to be some proportionality and exceptions in differing circumstances - which knowing Western Australia and having a sister who is a nurse there, I’m sure there will be in reality.
All I’m saying is that the state government there have done an amazing job of keeping the population safe, and most of them are very appreciative of that fact.

That rule does seem over the top to me. If they have no symptoms and wear full PPE then I would think they should be allowed to visit, both as an advocate for the child and their mental well being.

Josieann

Your case sounds distressing Doodledog especially with such a tiny infant.

In 2020 before vaccines and people weren't allowed to visit patients at all, does anyone know what the ruling was here in the UK for parents of young children in hospital?

It was very distressing, and was probably worse because if the doctor had been vaccinated it wouldn't have happened. That might seem silly, but I suppose it's easier to accept things that 'can't be helped' than those that could have been if not for someone's selfishness.

I appreciate, however, that I am not the most rational person when it comes to this issue, so although I would definitely vote in favour of the deliberately unvaccinated being banned from hospitals and care homes, it probably shouldn't be up to me.

I am so sorry for your experience doodledog. I am just trying to unpick all this a little, so if it was up to you (and I am pretty sure the Australian government wont be consulting either you or me) it would only be those who choose not to be vaccinated. It gets messy doesnt it because the risk to patients etc is the same whether they chose not to be vaccinated or whether they cant be vaccinated due to health grounds.

Yes, I appreciate that, too, and can see the problem. However, the number of people who can't be vaccinated is very small, and the risk would at least be mitigated. It seems unfair to penalise someone for a situation beyond their control, but I think it is different when not getting vaccinated has been a deliberate choice.

I suppose that's the worry for me penalizing someone because they think differently to me. I spent 10 years or so working for an HIV charity and this reminds me of the debates back then. Those who got tested and knew they were positive and therefore should be upfront with sexual partners, but alongside that those who didnt get tested and therefore could carry on with no need to tell anyone anything. It makes me uneasy all of it.

I don't see it as the same thing, though. In this case, there are two distinct groups. Those who are unable to get the vaccine, and everyone else. Those in the former group are relatively small in number, and if all other precautions are taken should, IMO, be able to visit children or others in hospital. Those in the latter group who refuse the vaccine are knowingly putting others at risk, and much as I feel for their children, the decision was theirs.

My medic dd has a TB immunity problem, Doodledog which cannot be resolved by any means. She has not been permitted to work with anyone with TB from Day One as a student, for both their sake and her own sake.

She has no desire to work as a respiratory doctor but even if she did, it couldn’t happen because of her TB status.

Thinking about it, the AIDS analogy works better if you see it as those who don't test (equivalent to those refusing the vaccine) muddying the waters for those who do (the vaccinated), and limiting the freedoms of everyone because no-one could be sure which group a new partner belonged to.

If everyone tested/vaccinated, both diseases would be easier to control. Yes, it might impinge on the freedom of those who don't want to, but the alternative is clear - they shouldn't have unproductive sex in one case, or they lose the right to be around vulnerable people in the other. I wouldn't advocate enforced testing or vaccination, but see no reason why there shouldn't be consequences for those who don't comply (trickier in the case of sexual behaviour, obviously).

SueDonim

My medic dd has a TB immunity problem, Doodledog which cannot be resolved by any means. She has not been permitted to work with anyone with TB from Day One as a student, for both their sake and her own sake.

She has no desire to work as a respiratory doctor but even if she did, it couldn’t happen because of her TB status.

Yes, and that is fair. it would be harsh if she wanted to work in respiratory care, but as it is not safe, it makes sense for her to be disallowed from doing so. This is the same principle, I think.