Carlton Supporters Club

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that a nurse should have the right to work if s/he has concerns that s/he may be harmed by the vaccine, even if the risk is speculative and there’s a countervailing risk to patients and coworkers. Then shouldn’t the patients have a similar right to refuse to be treated by unvaccinated nurses? After all, as a subset of the population they have more to fear from Covid than the average punter. If you’re a transplant patient going in for a checkup, would you want to reduce the risks of being infected by staff?

To exercise such a right to object, the unvaccinated status of staff would need to be communicated to patients and a sufficient number of suitably qualified vaccinated staff would need to be available to avoid patients being forced by circumstances to accept treatment from unvaccinated staff. Of course, anti-vaxxers will say forcing the unvaccinated staff to reveal their status is like the Nazis forcing the Jews to wear yellow Stars of David ...

Should the privacy and rights of unvaccinated staff take priority over the rights of patients? Should patients be told that their fears are unreasonable and their nurses’ vaccination status is not theirs to know?

I'll take that as a concession nurses don't do anything themselves to alert patients. And yay, administrators will always put their patients' interests first rather than worry about nurses going to war over their medical privacy or disruption caused by frequent requests for nursing changes ...

I'm sure you can read the tea leaves ... any patient who arks up over a nurse's unvaccinated status will be waiting a long time before they're seen. Of course patients could ask, but when you have a long wait in ED you won't want to be bumped. Or if you're booked in for surgery and then object to one of the nurses, you'd expect your operation will wait for another day.

Interesting that you are quite happy to write off any fear a patient might have as unreasonable, but the vaccination fears or objections of unvaccinated nurses are determinative no matter how remote risks associated with vaccination might be. And your opinion that patients are better off being treated by experienced unvaccinated staff is a little bit paternalistic. Better for patients to be bumrushed into accepting this by confronting them with a bureaucratic system which makes patients fear the Soup Nazi treatment if they don't go along to get along.   

But that’s you. Surely patients have a right to know and make their own decisions. I’d prefer the experienced double-vaccinated nurse who does rapid antigen testing. Apparently some Irish nurses are coming our way. They’re vaccinated and their accents are to die for.

It is argued the vaccination requirement, which will also apply to attending certain retail premises from October 11, is unlawful and invalid on several grounds.

These include that Mr Hazzard had no power to make the orders, failed to consider a number of relevant matters, considered irrelevant matters, and breached the requirements of natural justice.

Barrister Peter King, appearing for construction worker Mr Kassam, said it will be argued Mr Hazzard failed to investigate or inquire as to alternative treatment methods for COVID-19.

He asked vaccine expert Professor Kristine Macartney, a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI), about the opinion of a nutritionist that zinc, vitamin D and vitamin C “would be safe and effective treatments for COVID-19 patients”.

“No, I don’t agree with that,” Professor Macartney said.

Mr King raised a range of other drugs, including ivermectin – which is commonly used to treat parasites including worms – hydroxychloroquine, aspirin, asthma medication singulair, and the antibiotic doxycycline.

Professor Macartney said she has not personally been involved in any studies about the drugs’ effectiveness in treating COVID-19, but she has apprised herself of all the available evidence and reviews.

Asked about the effects of COVID-19 vaccines on pregnant women, including one of the plaintiffs, Professor Macartney said there is “a growing body of evidence on the safety of vaccination in pregnancy”, leading to the recommendation pregnant women receive the vaccination.

She said if a pregnant woman becomes infected with the virus “there is quite significant evidence of risk to the pregnant woman and the foetus”, including miscarriage.

Professor Macartney said COVID-19 vaccines have had one of the largest clinical trials of any vaccine in history, and rejected the contention that they are an “experiment”.

NSW Deputy Chief Health Officer Dr Marianne Gale said vaccination is associated with a reduction in onward transmission, which could stop a worker from catching the virus and spreading it to their household.

In written submissions, lawyers for aged care worker Ms Henry included a lengthy description of the process of injecting a vaccine into someone’s arm, describing it as an “invasive medical procedure”.

The submissions also reference the Magna Carta, which is said to confer a common law right to work, and a recent dissenting decision by one member of the Fair Work Commission, which criticised mandatory vaccination

Patients have the right to refuse treatment from a staff member regardless of CoVid,