UK woman lost nursing license and facing criminal trial for anti-vaccine event

Discussion in 'Coronavirus (COVID-19) News' started by kazenatsu, Nov 27, 2021.

PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening. We urge you to seek reliable alternate sources to verify information you read in this forum.

  1. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Absolutely not. It's the discussion we're having. What other context are you seeing?
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  2. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It could be argued that in some cases the perception of "nutcase" can be relative.
    Based on the underlying public perception to begin with. Two people can say things equally crazy, but only the person whose position diverges most from the rest of the majority of society will be seen as the crazy one.

    If someone claimed the vaccine would prevent you from getting infected and would mean you no longer have to wear a mask, and said anti-vaxxers are killing people, isn't it true that their comments would be equally nutty compared to what this woman said?

    If anyone here does not agree with that, then you have already proved the point. Double standards.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  3. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, the whole thing might end up in a court of law, if she sued for wrongful termination. But like I told you, generally the court sides with the employer in such cases, if the employer can show that what she is saying hurts the hospital's reputation. In this particular case, saying that the pandemic doesn't exist and that vaccines are MEANT to kill people, would easily qualify.

    Even an anti-vaxxer like you, do you think that the Covid-19 pandemic doesn't exist? Yes or no? Do you think that vaccines are MEANT to kill people? Yes or no?

    Her positions are extreme enough, and frankly far-fetched, that a hospital can legitimately say in a court of law, "we can't afford continuous employment for such person who goes out there, discloses that she works for us, and diffuses this kind of nonsense. People who might give us their business by coming to us for health care, may conclude that they don't want to come here because our nurses are insane; they might pick a competitor, thus hurting our bottom line, so we had to fire her."
     
    Sallyally likes this.
  4. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see that as circular logic because it is based on public perception, which is shaped by news media.

    If I owned a news station and slandered a doctor saying he was a bad doctor, would the hospital be allowed to fire him because his presence was "hurting the hospital's reputation"?

    That would not seem very fair.

    This would be like a self-reinforcing cycle.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  5. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As usual, it's hard to debate with you because you keep adding more to your posts.
    Yes, doctors issue opinions all the time, in the lay press, quote articles they may be the authors of, etc.
    All that I'm saying is that doing that has some risks, and can be used against the person, depending on what is being said.
    Sure, she can say whatever she wants... but there may be consequences. Don't you get this part?
     
  6. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe you should wait 2 or 3 minutes before immediately replying.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  7. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One big issue is that this involves the government. It's not just a private hospital firing her. The government is telling her that she cannot work in her job.

    So the right to freedom of speech has been thrown out the window.

    The government has retaliated against her for expressing her opinion. (or allowed the board to use government power to retaliate against her)
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  8. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    11,464
    Likes Received:
    9,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    As I’ve told you, a chemistry teacher shouldn’t run around claiming the ammonia/bleach blend. What she did is the exact same thing!

    if you truly believe COVID is a hoax and doesn’t exist, than there’s no point continuing this.
     
  9. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is it?
    It could be argued that what she expressed, though hyperbolic and over the top, was not too far away from the truth.

    This isn't a simple black & white belief about something everyone knows is unsafe and bad.

    If people like you are wrong about your belief, then this woman has been seriously wronged.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  10. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The problem resides in going blatantly against the truth. Saying that the pandemic doesn't exist is blatantly untrue. Saying that the vaccines are MEANT to kill people is blatantly untrue.
    Similarly, saying that the vaccine has a microchip in it, put there by Bill Gates, is not only untrue, but is nuts. I'd say that the two statements above are nuts too.

    We do not want to discourage debate and opinions that can be defensible. For example, debating the various studies on efficacy of the vaccines and what vaccinated people should or shouldn't safely do, are areas of debate on which not the whole field agrees; so, the boards would not discipline a person for debating those. But the whole field does agree that the pandemic is not fake, that it does exist. And nobody who is not INSANE would think that when a vaccine maker makes a vaccine, his intention is to kill people. So, a practitioner saying these blatantly untrue and frankly nuts things, will upset the board.
     
  11. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Such items of perception are subjective and would be the object of court scrutiny in a lawsuit for wrongful termination. The party that would argue best the case would prevail. Generally, that's the employer's side. Whether or not this is "fair" is another entirely different matter. For your information, life is unfair. Society is unfair. The Justice System is often unfair.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  12. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    11,464
    Likes Received:
    9,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Yes.
    Your failure to understand the science, does not invalidate the science.
     
  13. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The existence of a court to later be able to review things doesn't make this right or okay.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  14. MiaBleu

    MiaBleu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2017
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    2,627
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female

    Yes....code of conduct and professionalism is imperative in a nursing career.

    Her behavior is unprofessional. It is not a nurses role to go "political" or on some bandwagon.........that involves the public's health. She is supposed to be an agent of /for health.

    Has nothing to do with free speech ......eitehr..........

    With every right......such as free speach come RESPONSIBILITY........... one cannot say whatever they want whenever they want ....... particularly if it is potentially hurtful. Far to many emphasize the "rights" part and ignore the RESPONSIBLE part. as if they are ENTITLED.. (which is irresponsible )

    Standards are very important in the nursing and medical profession.....and must be maintained to the highest and most ethical degree.
     
    Bowerbird, CenterField and Sallyally like this.
  15. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But do you see how what you claim as being "science" is intimately tied up with whether what was done to this woman was wrong?


    Imagine me claiming something is science, you disagree, and so the government takes away your career.

    At that point I think we have reached politicization of science and politicization of acceptable thought. That is entering into Orwellian territory.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  16. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's very hard to be going back to stuff you posted two pages ago, and see that you changed everything or added to it. Your style of debating is extremely frustrating. We have no posting numbers limit here. There is no cap in how many posts you can issue. So if you say something, before you hit the Post Reply button, maybe you should review and see if you're content with it. If after you post it, you want to add something, start a new post.
     
    Bowerbird and MiaBleu like this.
  17. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    11,464
    Likes Received:
    9,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    No.

    just, no.

    See my chemistry example. It’s the same. Do you deny it’s dangerous for a chemistry teacher to recommend such nonsense?
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  18. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I hit the post reply button to try to immediately respond to your post right below yours.
    Otherwise 3 or 4 posts appear in between, and it can be hard for others to follow the conversation.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  19. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Public debate often involves something that could be potentially dangerous.

    What if government started taking away licenses from people who publicly argued against anti-terrorism policies, for example?
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  20. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    11,464
    Likes Received:
    9,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    We are talking about science based medicine. Public policy is for politicians. I don’t want my doctor spouting nonsense that an appendix can’t burst, or that eating fatty foods lowers cholesterol.

    huge difference.
     
    Bowerbird, MiaBleu and Sallyally like this.
  21. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't know what's the structure of the nursing boards in the United Kingdom. Over here in the United States, the State Medical Boards are not exactly "The Government." They are made of prominent citizens in the community, such as a representative of the Chamber of Commerce, a philanthrope, a law enforcement official, a lawyer with a reputable law practice, etc. The Board may or may not be directed by an MD. Sometimes it's an MD, sometimes it's some other prominent member of society. The Board will employ MDs to be able to understand the circumstances and standards of medical practices. It also employs lawyers, paralegals, etc. The Board is supposed to be a COMMUNITY organization that is meant to protect the community from substandard practice, from corrupt and unethical practitioners, etc. The Board is not affiliated with State Government. It is entirely independent, and it must be, in order to fulfill its duties without political interference.

    Now, what happens, is that the regulatory authority that belongs to State Government, is typically delegated by the government to the Board. So in this sense it would be "government" but not in all senses.

    An analogy would be the Federal Reserve. It's not exactly government... it's independent... but the government delegates to them the ability to regulate interest rates, etc.

    What you continuously don't seem to understand is that nobody is saying that she doesn't have the RIGHT to say what she said... but then, there are consequences to what she said, up to and including board action against her license.

    In a regulated profession like medicine and nursing, there is an established code of conduct. One of the elements of it, is about not advocating for practices that go against accepted standards. This is to prevent quackery from taking place. If a doctor sells to his patients snake oil and states it's a cure for leukemia, of course this will be conduct incompatible with the code of conduct, as there are no accepted standards of care that say that snake oil cures leukemia. So, that doctor will have his license taken by the board, to protect a member of the public from dying from treatable leukemia, by believing in this doctor and buying the snake oil from him, instead of actually taking a medication that can and will cure his leukemia.

    Does the doctor has the right to say that snake oil cures leukemia? Yes, sure, people can say whatever they want. But he'll lose his license. Get it? And it's not retaliation. It's done to protect leukemia patients from quackery that will actually get them killed.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
    Bowerbird likes this.
  22. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    OK, nobody else does what you do, but I'll try to give you two or three minutes before I reply to your reply. But I'm saying, it's annoying and complicated. Because sometimes, you change something several minutes after you posted it.
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  23. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Are you just an anarchist? You seem to be against everything that exists in an organized society. Now, the courts are not OK? Sometimes I get curious, are you a rebellious teenager or something? Because sometimes you seem to argue from a highly idealized, utopic position of absolute freedom. Sorry, my friend, but in organized society, there is no such thing as absolute freedom. Sorry, my friend, but yes, there are such things as courts, people get fired, people sue for wrongful termination, the courts look into it, issue a decision, sometimes fairly, sometimes unfairly.

    You think that "the government" doesn't have the right to regulate healthcare professions. Therefore you're against a board granting licenses (or taking away licenses)... without understanding the chaos that would be generated without such institutions. Can you imagine if just about anybody could simply rent an office and write on the door "Doctor" and start dispensing snake oil to "cure" all sorts of ailments? Society has a lot of bad guys... organized crime would take over. You would never know if the person you're seeing for your illness is a real doctor or not... since there would be no verifiable credentials.

    Of course these regulatory institutions are essential to the good functioning of these professions, for the good of society. Of course courts of law are a very important element of a civilized society, so that conflicts are not solved by clubbing someone in the head like it was done in pre-historic times. Conflicts and disagreements are solved through an organized set of laws and regulations, which are argued in front of a learned judge by counsel from both parties, and then a jury of citizens will say what side was more convincing. Abolish the courts, and you have anarchy.

    Do you want to abolish vaccines? Do they mean to kill? Well, one day you'll have children, and I bet it won't be very pleasant to have a child of yours dying of polio or measles.

    Do you want to negate the reality of the Covid-19 pandemic? The ostrich strategy of sticking your head in the sand and denying the pandemic, unfortunately won't make the pandemic disappear, and if you don't acknowledge the problem, you're unlikely to get protected, and you may end up dead or with organ damage.

    Like Curious Always said, if you share this nurse's belief that the pandemic doesn't exist and that vaccines are meant to kill people, then we are clearly wasting our time here, debating with you.
     
    Bowerbird, Sallyally and MiaBleu like this.
  24. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is no need to "reserve" a position for a post, by posting an incomplete post. People can still follow the discussion, if you allow the post you're replying to, to appear as a quote.
    Like I said, nobody else here keeps trying to reserve these positions... people can perfectly follow the discussion, by reading all the posts in a thread, in sequence, and because of the quote, they will know what you're responding to.

    I'd advise you to abandon this practice of your ever-changing content. Say what you want to say, even if some other posts come in-between. But once you say it, let it stand, because if you keep changing, a lot of what you add will not be noticed by the person you're speaking with, because the person will have replied to your incomplete post and will have moved on.
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  25. kiwimac

    kiwimac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,309
    Likes Received:
    451
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    In the UK it is the government which certifies nurses. As it is here.
     
    Bowerbird likes this.

Share This Page