It is easy to be good when it costs nothing

[Anonymous]

Yep, (pregnant) women and children first. I am not either and won't be getting a shot....

[Anonymous]

I think it would be a good idea for these clinics to have staff walking the lines, available for questions, and to help assist people like the woman described in the post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry for this woman, but I think children should be given priority over the elderly.

While I would have hardly stoned this poor woman, I would not have stopped anyone from explaining to her that she was not in the risk group, and if the clinic was specifically for children and pregnant women, I would have no problem with asking her to kindly wait her turn and get the vaccine at a later date.

And, if we are talking about respecting each other, SHE should show some respect to the children in line. It works both ways.

It is difficult to fully appreciate what it is like to feel old and frail until we get there.

It is difficult to watch your infant lie in a hospital bed hooked up to tubes unless you have been there. And I have, and I will do just about anything to avoid that happening, including telling an old woman, politely, that she is not a priority group that is being served right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is most people just said, "I am sorry, but you are cutting the line. People here have been waiting since very early this moring. The end of the line is there." No one really sent her packing, except to maybe discuss within her ear shot that she shouldn't be cutting the line. Once person told the MoCo reprentative managing the line about her attempts to cut the line. He then went to speak with her about 25 people down from her prior attempt. I actually think she is lucky with the crowd mentality that she didn't get far worse.

And thank you to the people who support that she should wait until the children get vaccinated. I feel the same way about pregnant women, who are dying at a far higher rate than the 25-64 crowd.

Do you intend to keep proving OP's point over and over again? You're really making her case more and more with every post you submit. You sound like a gross person! If you don't think she deserved a break, that's fine. Not arguing over that. I'm arguing about how superior you think you are and how pleased you sound with yourself that this old lady was "sent packing." You sound a bit disappointed that she DIDN'T get something worse. I'm sure you're a very nice person in real life, but perhaps you should think about where your heart is -- it sounds like it's in a very cold and self-centered place. Again, NOT talking about your infant vs. this old woman - I'm talking about the smugness you feel that this lady was put in her place. Yuck, yuck, yuck. Lady, you need a new world-view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry for this woman, but I think children should be given priority over the elderly.

While I would have hardly stoned this poor woman, I would not have stopped anyone from explaining to her that she was not in the risk group, and if the clinic was specifically for children and pregnant women, I would have no problem with asking her to kindly wait her turn and get the vaccine at a later date.

And, if we are talking about respecting each other, SHE should show some respect to the children in line. It works both ways.

It is difficult to fully appreciate what it is like to feel old and frail until we get there.

It is difficult to watch your infant lie in a hospital bed hooked up to tubes unless you have been there. And I have, and I will do just about anything to avoid that happening, including telling an old woman, politely, that she is not a priority group that is being served right now.

They didn't even run out of vaccine. So this isn't about saving lives. It's about making an old lady go to the back of the line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry for this woman, but I think children should be given priority over the elderly.

While I would have hardly stoned this poor woman, I would not have stopped anyone from explaining to her that she was not in the risk group, and if the clinic was specifically for children and pregnant women, I would have no problem with asking her to kindly wait her turn and get the vaccine at a later date.

And, if we are talking about respecting each other, SHE should show some respect to the children in line. It works both ways.

It is difficult to fully appreciate what it is like to feel old and frail until we get there.

It is difficult to watch your infant lie in a hospital bed hooked up to tubes unless you have been there. And I have, and I will do just about anything to avoid that happening, including telling an old woman, politely, that she is not a priority group that is being served right now.

They didn't even run out of vaccine. So this isn't about saving lives. It's about making an old lady go to the back of the line.[/quote]


Not to the back of the line, but hopefully, OUT of the line. It was not her turn.

And I am not the pp you quoted btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry for this woman, but I think children should be given priority over the elderly.

While I would have hardly stoned this poor woman, I would not have stopped anyone from explaining to her that she was not in the risk group, and if the clinic was specifically for children and pregnant women, I would have no problem with asking her to kindly wait her turn and get the vaccine at a later date.

And, if we are talking about respecting each other, SHE should show some respect to the children in line. It works both ways.

It is difficult to fully appreciate what it is like to feel old and frail until we get there.

It is difficult to watch your infant lie in a hospital bed hooked up to tubes unless you have been there. And I have, and I will do just about anything to avoid that happening, including telling an old woman, politely, that she is not a priority group that is being served right now.

They didn't even run out of vaccine. So this isn't about saving lives. It's about making an old lady go to the back of the line.[/quote]


Not to the back of the line, but hopefully, OUT of the line. It was not her turn.

And I am not the pp you quoted btw.

No, all the people could accomplish is to send her to the back of the line. If she had the stamina, she could have reached the nurse to be accepted or turned back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry for this woman, but I think children should be given priority over the elderly.

While I would have hardly stoned this poor woman, I would not have stopped anyone from explaining to her that she was not in the risk group, and if the clinic was specifically for children and pregnant women, I would have no problem with asking her to kindly wait her turn and get the vaccine at a later date.

And, if we are talking about respecting each other, SHE should show some respect to the children in line. It works both ways.

It is difficult to fully appreciate what it is like to feel old and frail until we get there.

It is difficult to watch your infant lie in a hospital bed hooked up to tubes unless you have been there. And I have, and I will do just about anything to avoid that happening, including telling an old woman, politely, that she is not a priority group that is being served right now.

They didn't even run out of vaccine. So this isn't about saving lives. It's about making an old lady go to the back of the line.[/quote]


Not to the back of the line, but hopefully, OUT of the line. It was not her turn.

And I am not the pp you quoted btw.

No, all the people could accomplish is to send her to the back of the line. If she had the stamina, she could have reached the nurse to be accepted or turned back.

Hopefully, turned back.

[Anonymous]

From the H1N1 chat on WP.com today, health official is Dr. Pierre Vigilance, director of Public Health for the District of Columbia.

Washington, DC: There have been issues raised that some non-priority adults have been able to receive the vaccine, by the urging of the clinic staff. Is it up to the clinic to make that call?

Dr. Pierre Vigilance: Clinic staff have been instructed to restrict vaccinations to youth (6 months - 24 years old), and expectant mothers. We want to ensure that these groups have access to vaccine now, and will continue to communicate this to those who come to our clinics. We appreciate the patience and understanding of those who are not in the priority groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the H1N1 chat on WP.com today, health official is Dr. Pierre Vigilance, director of Public Health for the District of Columbia.

Washington, DC: There have been issues raised that some non-priority adults have been able to receive the vaccine, by the urging of the clinic staff. Is it up to the clinic to make that call?

Dr. Pierre Vigilance: Clinic staff have been instructed to restrict vaccinations to youth (6 months - 24 years old), and expectant mothers. We want to ensure that these groups have access to vaccine now, and will continue to communicate this to those who come to our clinics. We appreciate the patience and understanding of those who are not in the priority groups.

Thanks for posting this. I am baffled about how this an issue. This lady clearly thinks she is above the regulations and recommendations and somehow more deserving than priority populations. While I hope people encountering this situation would respond calmly, respectfully, and patiently explain the situation, I just don't see how anyone can argue that this lady had a right to be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the H1N1 chat on WP.com today, health official is Dr. Pierre Vigilance, director of Public Health for the District of Columbia.

Washington, DC: There have been issues raised that some non-priority adults have been able to receive the vaccine, by the urging of the clinic staff. Is it up to the clinic to make that call?

Dr. Pierre Vigilance: Clinic staff have been instructed to restrict vaccinations to youth (6 months - 24 years old), and expectant mothers. We want to ensure that these groups have access to vaccine now, and will continue to communicate this to those who come to our clinics. We appreciate the patience and understanding of those who are not in the priority groups.

Thanks for posting this. I am baffled about how this an issue. This lady clearly thinks she is above the regulations and recommendations and somehow more deserving than priority populations. While I hope people encountering this situation would respond calmly, respectfully, and patiently explain the situation, I just don't see how anyone can argue that this lady had a right to be there.

We don't know whether she had a priority status, only that she seemed old. She could have qualified as an under 64 person with a complicating health condition. She could have qualified as someone who works in a health care setting, which would put her entirely above the clinic schedule - not unbelievable, because many healthcare workers have had difficulty getting immunized. but I don't hear anyone disputing a bunch of firefighters or nurses going to the head of the line. At the time, the clinics were generally taking all CDC priority cases and the simple fact is that she may have qualified in one of two ways.

But more importantly, she was a sick old lady and someone could have helped her find a manager at the clinic who could have made a proper determination, rather than letting her wander around ill without any help.

The bottom line is that the people who run the clinics need to make the determinations. And there's no point at getting mad at the people when it's the folks with the syringes who were letting people in or excluding them. I think that it's great that Dr. Vigilance is now being vigilant, but that wasn't what was happening in his clinics days ago. And it sure wasn't happening in Arlington. They changed policy three times during the two days I was there. I'm not saying that someone should deliberately circumvent stated policy, but we don't even know that happened. Charity towards others requires some assumption of goodwill. Certainly it does not allow for presumptive guilt.

[Anonymous]

I thought people over 49 or so weren't suppose to even get the shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought people over 49 or so weren't suppose to even get the shot.

nevermind...

You MAY Receive the H1N1 LAIV (Nasal Spray) if you are/have:
already gotten the seasonal flu vaccine injection
living with someone who is younger than 2 years or older than 49 years
living with someone who is pregnant
living with someone who has asthma, cystic fibrosis, heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, immunocompromised

[Anonymous]

According to the OP, she was trying to get into the clinic early, ie, I interpret that as trying to cut to the front of the line. If it was like many of the clinics happening last week, it was NOT for people over 24, unless you are pregnant.

There are a few clinics that were not taking ANYONE, healthy or not, under 25, because that is a priority population, even over older people who have a risk condition. I have a friend who is a health care worker administering the shot at a clinic in DC, and was told pregnant women and people under 25 only. So, if it was one of those clinics, this lady was NOT a priority group.

The mask thing is what is off-putting to me. It is fairly common knowledge that wearing a mask is NOT to protect the person wearing it, it is to protect other people from the sick person. That is why doctors and dentists wear masks, but sick people don't, in hospital or clinic settings. So I doubt very seriously there was any health reason she was wearing the mask - as it is NOT recommended outside of a hospital setting typically. She likely just put it on.

Look, I don't think it is acceptable to berate old ladies, young ladies, rich ladies, poor ladies. But if this was a priority clinic and she wasn't in the priority group, you can just shouldn't be there. And if a pregnant lady is missing work to stand in line, and she was told to come to a clinic serving her, then she should not have to let a older lady who came late to cut in front of her. It did not sound like this got out of hand, what was happening, it sounded like, was that people were trying to explain this to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to the OP, she was trying to get into the clinic early, ie, I interpret that as trying to cut to the front of the line. If it was like many of the clinics happening last week, it was NOT for people over 24, unless you are pregnant.

There are a few clinics that were not taking ANYONE, healthy or not, under 25, because that is a priority population, even over older people who have a risk condition. I have a friend who is a health care worker administering the shot at a clinic in DC, and was told pregnant women and people under 25 only. So, if it was one of those clinics, this lady was NOT a priority group.

The mask thing is what is off-putting to me. It is fairly common knowledge that wearing a mask is NOT to protect the person wearing it, it is to protect other people from the sick person. That is why doctors and dentists wear masks, but sick people don't, in hospital or clinic settings. So I doubt very seriously there was any health reason she was wearing the mask - as it is NOT recommended outside of a hospital setting typically. She likely just put it on.

Look, I don't think it is acceptable to berate old ladies, young ladies, rich ladies, poor ladies. But if this was a priority clinic and she wasn't in the priority group, you can just shouldn't be there. And if a pregnant lady is missing work to stand in line, and she was told to come to a clinic serving her, then she should not have to let a older lady who came late to cut in front of her. It did not sound like this got out of hand, what was happening, it sounded like, was that people were trying to explain this to her.

That clinic was taking all priority groups at the time, not just the under 25.

She said she was sick. She did not say she was infectious. You are assuming she had the flu or something. But she may have a weak immune system or some other condition that predisposes her to catching colds and flu, which very well could be the reason she is in a priority classification, specifically the 25-64 with a compromising health condition. So I don't know why that is inherently offensive. When my Mom was on chemo, she had to wear a mask in large public settings. She was sick. But she was not infectious.

So my point is that everyone with young kids is assuming that THEY and only they are the priority group. We are forgetting that at least two other groups qualify. The above mentioned one, and people who work in health care environments. I think also people who are around immunocompromised individuals are counted as well.

So again, I think it would be better of one person, out of a whole line of healthy adults, could have found some way to assist her, even if it was to bring her to someone who could tell her she can't get vaccinated, so an old sick lady doesn't have to stand in line for four hours.