No jab no job

PamelaJ1

This is a tricky one. I have come up with one question.
Does someone who hasn’t had the vaccine pose a bigger risk to someone else or are they just at bigger risk themselves.
If all the residents in, for example a care home, have been vaccinated are they at more risk if being cared for by someone who has said no to the vaccine?
If the answer is no then is there a problem?

Part of the issue is people have been vaccinated by age so there are lots of people with disabilities in care settings (not necessarily 'care homes') who wont have received a vaccine at all and will not do for some time. I'd have thought the best thing to do would be to vaccinate all the vulnerable residents with disabilities everywhere first if they could receive it but I am too involved to offer an unbiased response.

MissA you are right though, money gives people choices that are not afforded to poorer people

In principle, I think that it's fair enough to say that if someone has no medical reason not to have the jab but they choose not to, then they lose some of their rights, in order to protect people who are unable to have it for medical reasons.

I feel the same about the MMR. It's more difficult to suggest disadvantaging children, but as someone said upthread, you have to have a vaccination record before you can put your pet in a kennel, so I see no logical reason why that shouldn't apply to schools in the case of MMR, and the workplace in the case of the Covid vaccine.

When my son was born, he was in special care for a while, and one of the doctors had lied about having all her vaccinations and it turned out that she had TB. All the babies who had been under her care had to have tests, X Rays, and take prophylactic medicine.

My son was in SCU because of a difficult birth, but others in there were premature or had other medical issues - the thought of my son being at risk of TB was terrifying, but I can only imagine how the parents of some of the other babies must have felt. I really have a zero tolerance policy for vaccine refuseniks, unless they have a genuine medical reason for exemption.

I wonder if legislation may be put in place to say that a particular role is exempt from allowing a choice?

It happens with young females needing personal care, usually.
They can specify that they require only female carers.

What then for carers being expected to care for people who don't want the vaccine?

Besides which, as it stands (for now) the only people at risk of hospitalisation are the unvaccinated.

For new employees in an organisation, which is what the question was, the employer can advertise posts with that stipulation, they can make vaccination mandatory, and the employer would then be responsible for policing staff to make sure their vaccination status was kept updated. I think this will ultimately happen for frontline health and social care staff - it would be very difficult to argue such a policy is discriminatory if it is there for the specific reason of protecting vulnerable patients/clients where personal care is provided.

MissAdventure that is true but do you then have to give them a job?
If they pose a bigger risk to their workmates, people in their care do those people have a right not to be either working close to them to to be cared for by them?

It doesn't matter who agrees with what, from a legal standpoint.
You cannot make someone be vaccinated or have invasive medical treatment if they refuse.
Provided that is an informed decision.

This is a tricky one. I have come up with one question.
Does someone who hasn’t had the vaccine pose a bigger risk to someone else or are they just at bigger risk themselves.
If all the residents in, for example a care home, have been vaccinated are they at more risk if being cared for by someone who has said no to the vaccine?
If the answer is no then is there a problem?

I agree with the posters who say certain jobs would not be open to non vaccinated people. I had Hep B vaccination when I was working in Social Care and that was 20 years ago.
It's uncharted territory and I can understand why people are concerned,

I’m still of the opinion you can’t impose it on people. No one at the moment is certain of the efficacy as far as transmission is concerned, although I suppose if you are less likely to have the virus, you are less likely to spread it. What a very difficult subject.

Suziewoozie, Tangerine, Yes, the last sentence in my post was bit opaque, but as the whole of the rest of the post referred specifically to people in caring roles, I assumed it would be read in that context.

JaneJudge

MissAdventure, I'd be really quite cross about all that mixing within that household

I suppose the alternative is both people being put into a care home, and I wouldn't fancy their chances of surviving it.

It is a minefield of issues.

I could remove myself from the risk, I suppose, except I am on a zero hours contract, so I suppose then I could raise the issue of poorer people having less choice of prioritising themselves.
I do zero hours because of a lack of childcare for 13 year old children...
Another issue.
I work because I have been made to by the dwp.
Another issue?

Yes I managed a childrens home for the local authority and I dont know that I would have been allowed to do that. The HR department would have been on the phone I suspect.

Galaxy sorry I didn’t acknowledge your earlier post.

Lovetopaint - like suziewoozie I wonder whether your DD’s action was legal? I’m not getting at her (or you) just wondering about the legal situation. I guess at some point this might all be tested in the courts.

grandmajet, I'm all in favour of it. After all, anyone working as a dental nurse has to be vaccinated against hepatitis - and test immune too.

MissAdventure, I'd be really quite cross about all that mixing within that household

I know Im being a bit flippant here but isnt this a bit like the dogs?

.Without an up to date vaccination passport its almost impossible to get your dog into a training classes , boarding kennels , hydrotherapy or indoor pool and now even groomers are asking for vaccination books so that they dont run the risk of having an unvaccinated dog passing anything on to other 'clients'..

Is this the shape of things to come for us as well? Will we have to show this health passport to be accepted?
Also if its ok for firms/holiday resorts /airlines and pubs to ask for this medical information from you what else might they demand in the future?

Lovetopaint037

My dd manages a care home. She told the staff if they refused vaccination they would be put on unpaid leave. She had one agency carer who went in to work and gave Covid to a patient. The patient was isolated and the agency told never to send that particular carer.

That’s illegal surely ?

My dd manages a care home. She told the staff if they refused vaccination they would be put on unpaid leave. She had one agency carer who went in to work and gave Covid to a patient. The patient was isolated and the agency told never to send that particular carer.

The Pimlico Plumber owner jumped on the no vaccine no job bandwagon before the role out of vaccines in December. He will do anything for publicity for both him and his company.

I am another one who is in two minds over this, if I go to certain countries I have to prove that I have had certain vaccines, however it’s my choice to travel.

As far as I am aware NHS workers / carers are not forced to have the flu vaccine each year (happy to be corrected) Whereas our Armed Forces have to have whatever vaccines they are told to have.

I think it comes down to which outweighs the other - individual human rights or the collective right of the population?

It's such an interesting subject (not my liver!)

There are so many angles to consider.
The basic fact is that you can't force a person to be vaccinated, though, provided they are making an informed choice.
It may be the totally wrong decision, but it's theirs to make.

MissAdventure

It's never been a problem for me in terms of work.
I was told to take extra care of myself when in contact with body fluids.

I'll do a lot for my job, but parting with a piece of my liver is a bridge too far!

Gosh. I don’t blame you MissAdventure

Yes you expressed it much more clearly than I did night owl.

Article 6 Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights:

Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.

It seems to me that preventing someone from working unless they have had a particular medical intervention goes against the spirit of this.

In addition, BMA guidance states:

There is currently no exception to the law that will allow an employer to force their employees or workers to get vaccinated, as ultimately individual consent is still required.

I have said before and will say again, be very very careful what you wish for, forcing someone to undergo any medical procedure by any means at all is a very slippery slope. We either value our individual freedoms or we don’t, in which case we can choose to have a society where individuals can be compelled to undergo any kind or number of medical procedures for any reason dictated by the state.

It's never been a problem for me in terms of work.
I was told to take extra care of myself when in contact with body fluids.

I'll do a lot for my job, but parting with a piece of my liver is a bridge too far!

I have worked in a range of care positions, some suggested you should have a hepatitis injection for your own protection, none insisted and many were quite surprised when I mentioned it