Current Events > Anti-Vaxxers, Anti-Maskers. Should DRs+RNs be forced to wear masks for surgery?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Healthcare should be given on the basis on need.

We should not use it as a punishment or a reward.

Healthcare should be given on the basis on need.

We should not use it as a punishment or a reward.

Antivaxxers have inherently decided to vocally state they dont need healthcare. This is not a punishment or a reward, this is their choice. Do you not respect it?

To add, you cannot help someone against their will.

Just take their kids away from them and charge them with deadly child neglect. And put them at the bottom of the priority list for any medical treatment, even if theirs is a higher priority incident, someone with a lower priority incident who is not an anti-vaxxer should be given precedence

There is a difference between not giving healthcare because it is refused, and not giving it because you dislike them, or disagree with their decisions, or think they brought it on themselves. That's the thinking that right wing extremists use to deny healthcare.

To clarify, healthcare should be given on the basis of need to those who consent at the time to the treatment being offered.

This but include fat people, smokers and drinkers.

This but include fat people, smokers and drinkers.

if you are opting out of vaccines, that should be an automatic opt-out of healthcare in general. why should they get to pick and choose what professional advice they follow at the expense of every single other person in the system? why does their greed/selfishness outweigh other peoples lives?

If polled, I bet this board wants universal healthcare to be implemented.

But apparently that 'universal' doesnt apply to anti-vaxxers, drinkers, smokers, fat people, and random other groups that will be decided throughout time.

Such a weird train of thought to have.

There is a difference between not giving healthcare because it is refused, and not giving it because you dislike them, or disagree with their decisions, or think they brought it on themselves. That's the thinking that right wing extremists use to deny healthcare.

How about an anti vaxxer who contracted an infectious disease? Treat them, or let it spread?

No one is denying healthcare. Anti-maskers EXPLICITLY refuses treatment based on their ideology.

If they refused treatment for a specific issue, that is up to them, but if an anti masker wanted their broken leg set, or their cancer treated, or a heart bypass, you would be OK with that?

If polled, I bet this board wants universal healthcare to be implemented.

But apparently that 'universal' doesnt apply to anti-vaxxers, drinkers, smokers, fat people, and random other groups that will be decided throughout time.

Such a weird train of thought to have.

I assume that the anti-masker would prefer a doctor not to use a mask or vaccinate themselves with tetanus boosters and whatnot. Same thing as an LDS Christian who refuses blood transfusions. Or a racist who does not want black or asian professionals to work on them.

Holy shit you have no idea how horrible this sounds.

If polled this group is against fascism but in practice fascism is what they desire.

If they refused treatment for a specific issue, that is up to them, but if an anti masker wanted their broken leg set, or their cancer treated, or a heart bypass, you would be OK with that?

The doctor's mask and tetanus booster would be for their own protection, no?

Correct, so the anti-masker would refuse to be treated, then.

But what if they consented? Would you refuse it? That is the question I asked.

Yes, because otherwise that organ transplant or surgery slot would be better put to use on someone who isn't going to go out and get measles and die shortly after the procedure (if they haven't already begun spreading it in the hospital to vulnerable patients already)

Your "universal healthcare" point is a farce because in your example, the anti-vaxxer has already denied healthcare (universal or not).

Why would they consent to something that violates their religious beliefs?

Your argument that refusal of one procedure constitutes refusal of any future procedures is ridiculous.

based on what?
Also, the argument isn't "refusal of one procedure constitutes refusal of all future procedures"

We are talking about anti-vaxxers. A specific type of procedure. This isn't something that should be applied universally

If polled, I bet this board wants universal healthcare to be implemented.

But apparently that 'universal' doesnt apply to anti-vaxxers, drinkers, smokers, fat people, and random other groups that will be decided throughout time.

Such a weird train of thought to have.

Do you think that being anti vax implies a refusal to have an open wound stitched or a broken arm set?

It should, because there shouldn't be measles-infected people with open wounds infecting other people in hospitals, when everyone else is playing by the rules but they refuse to for selfish/non-reasons. Justify how its fair to someone else in the hospital to get infected by an anti-vaxxer when it's entirely preventable. It's a matter of health and safety for other patients, and anti-vaxxers are needlessly creating victims. They should absolutely be punished for that outside of the healthcare system, and within the healthcare system that should be treated as refusal of any healthcare.

It should, because there shouldn't be measles-infected people with open wounds infecting other people in hospitals, when everyone else is playing by the rules but they refuse to for selfish/non-reasons. Justify how its fair to someone else in the hospital to get infected by an anti-vaxxer when it's entirely preventable.

Anyone who has an infectious disease

Anyone who has an infectious disease should be isolated to prevent the spread of that disease. But they should not be denied treatment.

no. a preventable disease for which vaccines were offered

So they admit that they want a doctor that practices safe sanitization procedures, right?

But I would not deny them healthcare because of it.

I'm only offering the services that they say that they only want.

b) give treatment under insanitary conditions, because they were an anti vaxxer.

Anti-vaxxers are refusing safe sanitary conditions. So I would just be offering what their ideology demands.

No you aren't. You're assuming their anti-vax ideology is also an anti-sanitation ideology. Vaccination and sanitation are entirely different things.

No you aren't. You're assuming their anti-vax ideology is also an anti-sanitation ideology. Vaccination and sanitation are entirely different things.

But you're avoiding ai's question. If an anti-vaxxer (how you even know they're anti-vax is up in the air) walks into a clinic and asks for a wound to be stitched, should they be turned away? Yes or no.

Anti Vacc AND Anti-Mask, and other anti-crap. If you are Anti-Mask, then you are definitely anti-sanitization.

Anti-vaxxers are refusing safe sanitary conditions. So I would just be offering what their ideology demands.

But you're avoiding ai's question. If an anti-vaxxer (how you even know they're anti-vax is up in the air) walks into a clinic and asks for a wound to be stitched, should they be turned away? Yes or no.

How about people who have sex and get STDs? Or drug users with hepatitis? Or people who skateboard in shopping malls and break their ankles?

But you're avoiding ai's question. If an anti-vaxxer (how you even know they're anti-vax is up in the air) walks into a clinic and asks for a wound to be stitched, should they be turned away? Yes or no.