OP/ED by Michael Fattorosi from http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=626
Syphilis and Forced Employer Vaccinations…
On August 22, 2012, in Legal, by adultbizlaw
Today APHSS & the FSC begin a regiment of providing free antibiotic shots to porn performers in order to prevent the spread of syphilis. I have received numerous emails, texts, phone calls and DMs on Twitter from various members of the adult industry community as to the legality of an employer demanding that a worker receive a prophylactic antibiotic shot an as a condition of employment.
Basically, it is my understanding that certain production companies will not hire a particular performer unless they can show proof of receiving the antibiotic shot for syphilis through the APHSS system. I am unaware of any exception to this condition by APHSS or FSC that would allow a performer to seek out the consultation of their own physician as to the risks and benefits of receiving such treatment. Even though the prophylactic antibiotic shots begin today very little information has been disseminated to the performers other then if they receive the shot they can return to work in as little as 10 days. I have not seen much in the way of information being provided to the performers in regards to the risks of the antibiotic shot or the side effects of such. Nor have I seen much in the way of alternatives being proposed.
I cannot and will not provide medical advice. What I can say is that, legally, every person has the right to chose their own medical treatment from their own physician and if necessary refuse such treatment.
In California it is a well established rule of law that a physician who performs any medical procedure without the patient’s consent commits a battery irrespective of the skill or care used. The consent of a patient must be “informed.” Under the doctrine of informed consent the patient must have the capacity to reason and make judgments, the decision must be made voluntarily and without coercion, and the patient must have a clear understanding of the risks and benefits of the proposed treatment alternatives or nontreatment, along with a full understanding of the nature of the disease and the prognosis. Accordingly, the right to refuse medical treatment is equally “basic and fundamental” and integral to the concept of informed consent.
I urge all performers to seek out a consultation from their own physician as to the need for antibiotics for treatment for a disease they may not have and may not have even been exposed to.
As to whether an employer may force inoculations/vaccinations as a condition of employment it may be permissible under California law, however, any performer having an adverse reaction to the inoculation/vaccination would have a civil lawsuit and a workers’ compensation claim against the entities and production companies requiring such inoculation/vaccination as a condition of employment. In Maher v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd., 33 Cal.3d 729 (1983), a nurse’s assistant was required by her employer to undergo a physical examination that included a test for tuberculosis. When she tested positive for the disease, she was required to undergo treatment for tuberculosis as a condition of continued employment. She developed a significant adverse reaction to the treatment. The California Supreme Court held that employer-required medical treatment for a nonoccupational disease arises out of the employment and is compensable. (Id. at p. 738; see also Roberts v. U.S.O. Camp Shows, Inc. (1949) 91 Cal.App.2d 884, 885 [205 P.2d 1116] (Incapacity caused by illness from vaccination or inoculation may properly be found to have arisen out of the employment where such treatment is submitted to pursuant to the direction or for the benefit of the employer.)
By demanding and directing the prophylactic antibiotic shot, those production companies requiring such open themselves up to a myriad of liability as to any death, incapacity or future treatment resulting from such decision. It is cautioned that the performers seek medical advice as to the treatment and production companies seek legal advice to the ramifications of demanding forced prophylactic antibiotic shot as a condition of employment.
Why is Michael Fattorosi getting any air time after its been proven last year that he is no friend to the industry?
The sad fact is Mr. Syphilis will be welcomed back by this time next year.
A perfect illustration of the limited utility of legal analysis in diagnosing problems and prescribing solutions.
Let’s try the analysis of a physician (who posted on Danny Wylde’s blog late Monday night):
Outside the industry people who test positive for STIs are reported to the public health department (HIPPA is about insurance privacy, and sharing results with other medical providers for medical reasons isn’t a violation of HIPPA).
Outside the industry, people who test positive for STIs are given antibiotics (where indicated), and all of their partners are strongly urged to be treated with prophylactic antibiotics without being tested or before test results are completed.
Outside the industry, people with confirmed STIs may be given antibiotic pills to give to their partners without the partners coming in for testing nor requiring the partners to see a medic for their own prescriptions.
Industry workers are not exempt from public health protocols and neither should they be offended when public health measures are applied to infectious breakouts in their “workplace”.
All citizens and residents are subject to the loss of certain autonomy and privacy when they contract a communicable disease that poses serious risk to health and life.
As a medical clinician, it concerns me to read that a testing organization exists without a safety net of follow up services when performers test positive for STIs. This would be considered unethical at best, illegal at worst if an organization with lack of follow-up protocols were providing such services to the general public. In fact, labiratories and medical practitioners are responsible to public health departments for reporting all positive cases of HIV, syphilis and gonorrhea (as well as whooping cough, measles, mumps, diphtheria et al.).
Nothing unreasonable or extreme is being imposed in this outbreak. It’s the same protocols applied to everyone who either gets or comes in close contact with someone who has a serious communicable disease. Deal with it! Don’t whine about it. And value yourselves enough to hold the industry to AT LEAST the same level of health and safety standards that the general populous enjoys.
Signed,
A Non-industry Physician who stumbled upon this blog.
So I guess this means the girls being forced by Manwin to get shots where they want them to are “employees” of Manwin now (and not independant contractors?) and entitled to insurance, benefits, and workman’s comp?
Lets also not forget this ambulance chaser OP was involved with PornWikiLeaks.
Regarding forced vaccinations, actress Jenny McCarthy has argued that her son’s autism was triggered by immunizations.
…meanwhile many strains of HPV cause cancer….
Jenny Mccarthy is a former playboy playmate and about as bright as a 10 watt light bulb. She can claim whatever she wants as long as there is no documented over time proof about her son’s health issue.
It’s a fact that vaccinations can n do cause death, paralysis and that over 30,000 adverse reactions are reported annually on the VAERS website. Vaccination is part of modern day religious science, along with chemo and cytotoxic poisons that are supposed to make us well. We call these things “common knowledge”, but theg only thing that means is its been repeated over n over by those we
acqiesce to deem as our authorities. Vaccine comes from “vacca”, which means cow, as, originally, blood n puss from the sores from the underbellies of diseased cows were scrapped off and injected into peoples arms. Monkey testcles, aborted human fetal tissue, metals, viruses, bacteria, mercury, formaldehyde (used for embalming), etc, is what you may be injecting in concentration for your “protection”. Question authority, sheeple.
And its been proven that hpv almost never causes cancer while hpv vaccinations cause cancer in mass. But u wont read this info from those who dominate the cancer research field, which are the same murdering corporations profitting off the problem. Who funds research? Chemical, oil and pharmaceutical companies. Trusting these biased bastards is more ludicrous than trusting tobacco companies to honestly inform u about the non-harms of smoking.