Skip to main content
You're viewing the free public version. Create a free account for full research and member tools. Join free

Health Care Worker Alert: ABC News Misquoted Vaccine Rights Attorney

lawpapa
by lawpapa
· Published Apr 19, 2013 · 4 min read · Sources
0:00 / 0:00
0:00 / 0:00

Sign in to access this feature

Create a free account or sign in to use AI summaries, listen to articles, download PDFs, and save to your library.

1,268 views
Share:

This article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2013

Visit our Re-post guidelines

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Health Care Worker Alert: ABC News Misquoted Vaccine Rights Attorney

 

Eight nurses who were fired by their hospital-employer for refusing flu vaccines got national attention earlier this year when ABC News reported on the event. This brought much needed national attention to a trend rapidly sweeping the nation, that of hospitals requiring their employees to get flu shots or lose their jobs. A large percentage of healthcare workers object to the new policy, but most are getting the shot because they can't afford to lose their jobs and are not aware of laws that could help them avoid the shot, or because they are afraid they'll be fired just for asking for an exemption. We applaud ABC News for bringing national attention to this matter.

However, the article's author misquoted me (a leading vaccine rights attorney) in a way that could put healthcare workers unnecessarily at risk if they rely on this article. Specifically, the article quoted me as saying: "Religion is legally broad under the First Amendment, so it could include any strongly held belief . . . the belief [that] flu shots are bad should suffice." This is not true, and not what I said. First Amendment protections do NOT extend to "any strongly held belief," they extend only to beliefs that are "religious in nature" as the law defines that phrase, and that are also sincerely held. As for the legal meaning of "religious in nature," it takes a consultation to explain and explore that matter with clients individually so that they can put together a legally sound statement of religious beliefs opposed to immunizations that works for them and their particular situation. Rights vary according to the specific situation and circumstances, and to the laws of the relevant jurisdiction(s).

Of the approximately 150 healthcare workers in some 26 states that I assisted this past fall and early winter, the vast majority were successful, despite the fact that most of the hospitals had implemented unlawful vaccine exemption policies. The most difficult cases are the ones who first contact me after their employer has already rejected their exemption request. Unfortunately, most people who write a statement of religious beliefs opposed to immunizations without first learning what beliefs the law does and doesn't protect unwittingly fall into one or more "legal pitfalls" that can undermine their exemption rights. This area of law is just not consistent with most people's common sense approach. So, it is safest to get help from a knowledgeable attorney up front, as it can be difficult to "un-ring the bell," as the saying goes, to recover from a rejection or your exemption request after you submit a statement that turns out to have a technical legal flaw.

The ABC News article did go on to correctly quote me as having said, "If your personal beliefs are religious in nature, then they are a protected belief [sic]," but that is only part of the equation; the beliefs must also be "sincerely held"—again, as the law defines that phrase. So, healthcare workers should NOT rely on the ABC article when considering their rights.

No offense is intended to the ABC News article's author; the law in this area can be confusing. To the contrary, we appreciate ABC News for letting their readers know that some professionals feel so strongly about the matter that they are willing to lose their jobs to avoid flu shots. Indeed, the small number who lose their jobs represent a vastly larger number who object to mandatory flu vaccines but who simply can't afford to sacrifice their jobs to prove it.

Alan Phillips, J.D. is a leading national vaccine rights attorney and vaccine legislative activist. For more information, see www.vaccinerights.com, or email Alan at [email protected].

The above is for educational purposes only, and is not intended to be legal or medical advice. 

lawpapa

lawpapa

Alan Phillips, JD, a leading Vaccine Rights attorney, advises clients and other attorneys nationally regarding vaccine exemptions and waivers for school, college, work, the military, immigration, vaccine custody disputes, and newborn infants. Alan assists with vaccine legislation nationally, is a host or co-host of 2 weekly vaccine radio shows, and is the author of The Authoritative Guide to Vaccine Legal Exemptions, the only in-depth, authoritative information about your vaccine exemption and waiver rights in the U.S.

Read More from This Author

Sign in to follow authors

Create a free account or sign in to follow your favorite authors and keep up with their latest work.

Share:

References are included within the article body above.

Comments

Sign in or create a free account to join the conversation.

Sign in to comment

Be the first to comment.

Trusted By Professionals and Teams:

The National Health Federation
Stand For Health Freedom
Global Healing Institute
Global Wellness Forum
MAHA Action
Myers Detox
Natural News
Mercola.com

Unlock Evidence-Based Health Research

Join 500,000+ members accessing 10,000+ natural health topics.

Subscribe to our informative Newsletter & Receive

Cancer Fighting Foods Ebook

Our newsletter serves 500,000 with essential news, research & healthy tips, daily.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.