Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
Alright Greekchat legal scholars, here's one for ya, and this is as good a thread as any to ask this.
I have a client who is a healthcare worker who is being required by her employer, a private hospital, to get the swine flu vaccine as a condition for future employment. She is afraid of the side effects and doesn't want the vaccine. What the hell kind of legal argument does she have?
|
I'm no legal scholar, but could it possibly be a human rights issue? The facility is attempting to force an employee to undergo precautionary (not necessary) medical treatment. There may not have been serious side effects in the clinical trials, but the thing is still experimental in nature. Plus, everyone reacts individually. If she has a bad reaction to the vaccine or the preservative serum, her health could be in serious danger and the company may be liable if its coercion left her vulnerable to that possibility. Perhaps putting her at that risk would potentially violate an employee's right to a safe and healthy work environment? At the very least, it undermines her dignity and personal freedom.
It's a stretch, but I'm sure you could bs it into a good argument. As far as precedence, apparently there were deaths associated with a swine flu vaccine back in 1976 that people are bringing up now. The other side would no doubt bring up cases of healthworkers who died after contracting H1N1 so you'd have to be prepared to defend against that.