Im not a Conscientious objector to Tetanus shot but. . .

[Benny_Boy83]

Myself and another leaders did a four day expedition with a group of teenagers over the January Holiday's to Mt Barney National Park, Barney Creek area. It was hot, but the water and adventure more than made up for it.

One of the boys Parents has notified on the medical form next to "Date of last tetanus booster" that they are a "Conscientious Objector." The kids ended up on the hike only because i received the form at the last minute and was not in position to take him home as he had come in a car pool. The boy had no no worries on the camp, other than lack of fitness. I could tell the camp had been of immense benefit to him.
But his lack to tetanus immunity alway hung in the back of my mind. I joked that if you don't come back from a camp with at least one scratch, then you haven't adventured hard enough. But for this kid it could have meant trouble.
Hiking carries all sorts of risks, but I am surprised in this case by the lack of a preventative measure, regarding what could be a serious issue that most of probably don't even think about because we know were protected.

Would you take someone who isn't up to date with tetanus booster? Would you send them home? Im still looking to our groups policy, but i am curious for outside feedback.

https://sectionhiker.com/tetanus-guide- ... venturers/

[weeds]

It’s there choice and I assume they know the risks......

Am I right that the effects of tetanus is a delay condition and unlikely to cause an issue over the weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[weeds]

Out of interest how often should we have a booster??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[GPSGuided]

Just read that there are 59,000 tetanus death per year globally. Wow! Otherwise WHO recommends booster for adults every 10 years.

For the OP, your charge wouldn't likely to develop the symptoms until a week or more later. If they refused vaccination, then it's their fate. Fortunately, tetanus is not transmitted from person to person, so there's no harm to the rest of the group.

[Xplora]

In the end I think the final say will rest with policy and the insurer. It is not like a playgroup taking a child whose parents refuse vaccination. Recent studies show the vaccination may be good for much longer than 10 years and it is no longer recommended you have a booster until 50 if you have followed the infant and teenager course of immunization but again that is not helpful if there is no vaccination at all. Discussions with the boy's parents would be helpful to find out their objection in detail. It may go further to the point they refuse treatment should he develop symptoms. Understanding how tetanus works may also help you in the field should the boy get an injury. It is unlikely a scratch will cause any problems. Tetanus is an anaerobic bacteria so it will grow without air. That is why deep puncture wounds are more of a concern. Cleaning a deep wound properly and then getting some iodine into it as soon as you can will help. Death can come by asphyxiation after the diaphragm 'locks up' or is paralysed but it can also affect the heart. Tetanus immunization is usually administered with all the other infant jabs so the objection may have been to other diseases such as whooping cough. There may be some immunity transferred from the mother if she was vaccinated for it. It would be helpful to find out more about that. It is a survivable condition but that can take months but symptoms can occur within one day with the average of 10 days. Assessing the risks is important and until that is done to the satisfaction of all then I would say no more trips for this boy.

[Lizzy]

Current Australian recommendations;
http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/inter ... ook10-4-19

A lot of adults are now getting a booster when a Bub or grandchild arrives as it comes with the whooping cough (pertussis) vaccine.
Most people with a tetanus prone wound will get a jab if it’s been more than 5 years since their last shot or they can’t remember.
An unimmunised person would need shots of immunoglobulin if they had a wound- wonder if the would object to that too???

[Warin]

One of the boys Parents has notified on the medical form next to "Date of last tetanus booster" that they are a "Conscientious Objector." The kids ended up on the hike only because i received the form at the last minute and was not in position to take him home as he had come in a car pool.

Solution: The Medical Form needs to be provided a week before the excursion. This would allow time for assessment of any risks, any extra training and/or equipment (e.g. epi pen) and exclusion without last minute panic.

[Lamont]

What's done is done. However, DO NOT take any kids out again until you have all the legal guidelines. This sounds like an informal activity, but believe me you must know all the answers before doing this again.
Parents/Guardians can be all light and goodness until it hits the fan. Plus are you sure you are set to care for them? You must be forearmed with all the details. You should not have to ask this-it is a legal matter!
I am a secondary school teacher, have taken about a hundred excursions over the decades (not even an outdoor ed teacher and the restrictions on excursions let alone adventure ones are incredibly detailed) and here is how I would approach it, it is very straightforward;
1 - you must determine if this is (tetanus jab) essential for attendance i.e no jab-no go
2- If it is not essential -well you are just getting some info-he goes.
3- You determine it is essential (legal/medical advice/statutory guidelines)- all forms, no exception returned one week/two weeks before the event NEVER ON ANY ACCOUNT TAKE THEM ON THE DAY-no forms and your decision is easy -no go.
Also you say "you and other leaders" suggesting this was an organised group. You should therefore have ALL guidelines clearly stipulated which you must follow assiduously and working with children documentation etc. This should all be known. My advice is don't bend the rules-- and if you don't know what to do --- HE/SHE DOESN'T GO --NO EXCEPTIONS , or the whole thing could come back and bite you right on the khyber.

[Benny_Boy83]

Cheers for the responses, I't a lot of food for thought. It was a formal group made up of smaller groups of the same organisation from surrounding regional towns and cities. The medical got past the local group and left us in a predicament. That oversight is something I'm looking into. Lamont, you are right from a legal perspective, i work for a local council and what you say, falls in line with similar policies need to adhere to. At the same time I've also been hearing the "you can't treat them differently because of their choices" argument. But there is also duty of care. Thanks for the feedback folks.

[Benny_Boy83]

Another thought since there isn't another thread on the forum like this. What if its an adult? and the setting is an informal or formal group?

[Warin]

At the same time I've also been hearing the "you can't treat them differently because of their choices" argument.

If they chose to participate in an event then they must comply with any requirements of that event.
No ifs, no buts... you don't want to comply .. then don't participate, simple.

Many examples of requirements for doing things... like driving a car.

Does not matter about age, sex, race, religion.

An informal group .. if you feel that it does not meet your requirements then you have choices - leave, talk, or shut up.

[Lamont]

Hi, this is a simple case of duty of care, this is a teenager. You are completely bound by the law acting as their guardian in the absence of that person. You really must take note of the law and only the law in this matter, I can not stress this enough. The "I've also been hearing you can't treat them differently" thing you referred to is completely irrelevant. If you think you have a choice and can ignore the law in this you must think again. You have NO choice. There is not "also a duty of care' -there is ONLY a duty of care. Nothing else is pertinent here.

[Benny_Boy83]

A few extra bit of info i've found regarding QLD health, This does come from the early childhood section. Im still looking for youth.

4.2.7 Parents who refuse vaccination
Some parents may choose not to vaccinate their children entirely, they may choose to delay vaccination or only choose some vaccines. In these cases the child’s immunisation status will show as ‘not up to date’. Under Queensland law, enrolment and attendance of these children is at the discretion of your service.
Australian Government legislation about a child’s immunisation status and family assistance payments no longer permits ‘conscientious objection’ as a valid exemption to immunisation. Children whose immunisation status is not up to date will not be able to access family assistance payments of Child Care Benefit, Child Care Rebate and Family Tax Benefit Part A end-of-year supplement. For more detailed information on the Australian law visit www.humanservices.gov.au

4.2.9 Legal protection
Section 179 of the Public Health Act 2005 has been amended to stipulate that services who act honestly in making decisions on the enrolment or attendance of children based on their immunisation status are not liable civilly or criminally or under an administrative process.
This means that services are protected from liability for making the decision to refuse enrolment or attendance of children not up to date with their vaccinations. Similarly, protection is also offered should services decide to accept enrolment or attendance regardless of immunisation status.
Refusing to allow the enrolment or attendance of a child based on the child’s immunisation status is not considered discriminatory

[GPSGuided]

Given the fact that you are a private enterprise, you have every right to not accept the applicant, with or without the above. It really is a policy of your organization and that's it. Parents who refuse to immunise their kids are only harming themselves as well as the society.

[north-north-west]

It’s there (sic) choice and I assume they know the risks......

It's their parents' choice, and the parents were not, in this case, the ones at risk. You don't gamble with someone else's money (or life) when the dice are loaded against you.

[Benny_Boy83]

It has been an interesting 36 hours. Found out two of the guys at work are conscientious objectors to certain inoculations.. They pointed out that there are known cases of reactions to inoculations. They pointed out that there may be liability on behalf of an organisation if a child is forced to be immunized in order to join up and that child has a reaction.
Some Gents further up my organisations hierarchy and I discussed this late last night, and we came up with a simple scenario to put to parents.

This scenario assumes that the parent is already aware of the risk of tetanus and that all duty of care has been taken and risk assessment/procedures have been followed by leaders.

We would ask the parent before the expedition “in the event that a child/youth ends up at the doctors/emergency department and a medical professional determines that a booster shot is necessary, would you as the parent consent to the procedure knowing full well what tetanus can do?
This put the liability and the consequences of their contentious objections and the choice of procedure on the parent.
It would then be necessary to get this answer in writing from the parent.

That seemed to be the simplest solution. I think this is a line of questioning we will adopt for future events. It then allows for a more informed choice weather to accept the child/youth on camp.

[Warin]

As a child I was rendered blind for 3 days. There is the possibility it was cased by an inoculation .. or other things.

Since than I have taken all the inoculations that were 'convenient' , I have never refused an inoculation for any possible consequences. I have never had any further reactions (other than the usual ones expected from those inoculations). One work college had a bad reaction probably due to a flue shot, I don't think they have taken one of those again. Considering the number of people I know and how many have had effects .. I think the number of reactions are small, so I accept the risks believing they are outweighed by the benefits.
As a community there is a requirement for a majority of the population to have inoculations otherwise the community will suffer. Those who think they are safer by not having inoculations are counting on the rest of us having inoculations .. unless they have some personal reaction or family history of reaction then I regard them as 'freeloaders'.

[GPSGuided]

There’s no risk free guarantee in life, same as for any medication and vaccines. But key is the good is far greater than the bad. Yep, there may be reactions, but so rare and mostly are temporary. So many have lost sight of the big picture and lack perspective. Maybe just let natural selection take care of them.

[Mark F]

I suspect the parents may have a change of mind after visiting their child in an intensive care unit should tetanus be contracted - not likely but a possibility.

I think it would be really interesting to return anti-vaxxers to the 1950's when polio was unfortunately around and visible in its effect on people and families not to mention chicken pox, measles and diptheria et al. While I don't have any data, I suspect the risk of an adverse reaction is far less than the risk of death or serious injury travelling in a car to and from your bushwalks over the course of a year.

[Gadgetgeek]

Its a hard one. As far as refusing a kid on camp, yeah. Good luck with that. Its just not practical, kids show up at a new school a day before the camp happens, and you do your best. Vax is nothing compared to "Oh, I found out this week that I have this allergy, and I don't have x medication, or my parents signed the forms, but you know, they don't speak english, they may or may not have run the form through google translate, they are over-seas, and ....." You rely on your staff as professionals. Any kid could have a congenital heart defect that is just waiting for the time to strike, So what? Not take anyone? Yes there is duty of care, but how far does that extend, do I care what they had for breakfast before arriving, for the week beforehand, that they did their homework and kissed momma goodbye? You have to draw the line somewhere for your own sanity, because the line will be drawn for you in hindsight at the tribunal, and you can't operate like that.

As far as Vax go, not my problem. If a kid gets an injury, and then gets ill later on, and a vax could have prevented it, its on the parents. The simple fact is that the current liability guidelines for minors in Australia (or at the very least QLD) has me liable for that kid for something like 5-10 years after they turn 18. I don't remember how long, because it doesn't much matter, it will be settled in court some time in the far future, probably long after any memory of the incident is long since washed from my mind by a hundred other similar ones. I can't worry about that. A hundred things are more likely than tetanus, like they decide 10 years from now that their quality of life is limited because they tore their achillies while on camp. That said, if I had an unvaxxed kid who had the sort of injury that might lead to tetanus, then my duty of care involves the evac to suitable care, just like it would for a vaxxed kid, because the likely-hood of that kid not ending up getting a medical evaluation with a wound like that, is slim, they are very likely on their way home. Duty of Care solved.

If it was an informal thing, or with adults, then as a professional, I have whatever duty of care I either take on, or allow those that I am with to assume I'm taking on. So if my friends go "he's the pro, do what he says" and I let them follow me, then I need to have my crap together. If however I say, you are on your own, I will advise, but I make no promises that I'm at all knowledgeable about this, then that is different. Again, you stuff it up, the line will be drawn for you later. The best you can do is be aware of the precedents and have a good idea of what your depth actually is.

[mikethepike]

Three years ago I witnessed an un-vaccinated dairy goat die of tetanus and it was just appalling. To witness the same illness and slow, terrible but inevitable death in your own child when it is so easily avoided is almost unthinkable. I've personally never deliberately gone to the doctor's to be vaccinated but accidents every 5-7 years generally see me being stitched up and invariably vaccinated for tetanus. Any parent preventing or brainwashing their children not to be vaccinated for tetanus must be an idiot. There's no other word to describe it. Make sure you are vaccinated every 10 years.

[GPSGuided]

Many people are not logical and are ignorant. Vaccines have been a huge public health advancement and widely adopted in those days because people die every day from those diseases. Now with widespread vaccination, people no longer see the deaths and sufferings, hence benefits. The decision to come up with excuses like conscientious objector is just straight ignorance and selfishness. Effectively, those objectors are hiding behind those who have vaccinated and being passively protected by the herd immunity that the rest of us have contributed to. Each who have vaccinated have taken on the tiny tiny tiny risk of adverse reaction from these vaccines to avoid the far higher risk of diseases in self and the community, allowing parasitic behaviours to feed off it. Quite pathetic.

[Moondog55]

Not just ignorant, it is plainly anti-social as well.
There were good reasons immunisation and vaccination were compulsory and mandated when we were kids, our parents accepted the risks because of the greater good these preventative measures provided

[andrewa]

[trekker76]

To witness the same illness and slow, terrible but inevitable death in your own child when it is so easily avoided is almost unthinkable.

Its actually about 85-90% survival rate in the 1st world.

I am all for compulsory vaccination when its a big killer and/or there's a chance to wipe it out( small pox, polio, tet, diptheria etc). I'm happy with 1980's level vaccinations for some of the other stuff, like flu shots =personal choice. As to the public good , No.1 by far is tackling overweight/obese kids. 1/4 of all kids fit the category now, another 3-4 million fat adults in the making at risk of the big ticket diseases- heart , liver problems, diabetes. Not even decent ad campaigns running on this, plenty on selling those flu shots...

[Huntsman247]

To witness the same illness and slow, terrible but inevitable death in your own child when it is so easily avoided is almost unthinkable.

Its actually about 85-90% survival rate in the 1st world.

I am all for compulsory vaccination when its a big killer and/or there's a chance to wipe it out( small pox, polio, tet, diptheria etc). I'm happy with 1980's level vaccinations for some of the other stuff, like flu shots =personal choice. As to the public good , No.1 by far is tackling overweight/obese kids. 1/4 of all kids fit the category now, another 3-4 million fat adults in the making at risk of the big ticket diseases- heart , liver problems, diabetes. Not even decent ad campaigns running on this, plenty on selling those flu shots...

Not many people profit when you go for a run...

[neilmny]

............As to the public good , No.1 by far is tackling overweight/obese kids. 1/4 of all kids fit the category now, another 3-4 million fat adults in the making at risk of the big ticket diseases- heart , liver problems, diabetes. Not even decent ad campaigns running on this, plenty on selling those flu shots...

The millions are to be made in getting the kids obese not in undoing the process. The histeria over a lot of this vaccination stuff is driven by the big drug companies but there are diseases that we should be vaccinated against without question.
In 2011 when I had a heart attack, which I survived by the skin of my teeth, over 20000 people in Australia were dying of heart disease per year. It is bizzare that there is no outcry or histeria about such a disasterous situation, but where is the opportunity to make the millions out that.

[Moondog55]

Trillions to be made from taxing sugar just like they make trillions from the taxes on all the other fun stuff like tobacco and alcohol, not to mention the gazillions of opportunities to tax junk food like Maccas and Dominoes fast food-like substances with a "Fat Tax"
That however is separate from the arguements in favour of vaccinations and immunisations
I have a doctors appointment this afternoon, I'll discuss booster shots with him, it has been at least 20 years since I had my compulsory food service shots and about the same since my last tetanus booster [ the day I almost cut my thumb off] so maybe I need to play catch-up. Already had my flu shot for this year although I see discussion about this years shot needing a booster after 3 months so I'll ask about that too.

[trekker76]

Trillions to be made from taxing sugar just like they make trillions from the taxes on all the other fun stuff like tobacco and alcohol, not to mention the gazillions of opportunities to tax junk food like Maccas and Dominoes fast food-like substances with a "Fat Tax"

Trillions to be made for who though. The corporations pass the expense back to consumers, get rich of inflated prices, as does the government. The money is all coming from one place, the average persons pocket, who keeps using the substance anyway if its suffiiciently addictive/advertised for him to do so. Which it will be.

[Moondog55]

Trillions for the government naturally, and I'd hope the money received would go to health care rather than subsidized booze in the Parliamentary bars