“The Italian State is not free” Over 50 adds a footnote and they do not vaccinate it. The informed consent problem breaks out – Time


The Codacons: Doctors refuse vaccination to over 50s which modifies informed consent

Grace Maria Coletti

“The Italian State is not free”. Over 50 adds a pen note and does not vaccinate it. Informed consent bursts out in a vaccination hub in Rome. What happened in a vaccination center in the capital, where a woman over 50, following the vaccination obligation introduced by the Government, had gone to undergo the anti-Covid vaccination, was sent home by medical staff, who refused to administer the vaccine dose.

The case is announced today by Codacons, to which the woman turned to obtain legal assistance. Here’s what happened. Wednesday 12 January the lady goes to the Cesa Vaccinal Center in Via Alvaro del Portillo to undergo the anti-Covid Moderna vaccine – the Codacons reconstructs – When signing the informed consent that, as is known, all vaccinated must sign, the woman takes out a pen from the bag and, on the page where it is specified that the citizen has “understood the benefits and risks of vaccination”, adds a sentence writing verbatim “not freeing the Italian State, which obliges me to this vaccination, from any possible adversity , resulting illness, or any undesirable effect resulting from it “.

The health staff of the vaccination center notices the annotation written in pen by the woman, and a heated discussion arises with the intervention of the director of the facility that leads the doctors present to add to them once a counter-annotation to the form on informed consent , writing “You take a look at the apostille inserted by the patient on the first sheet and do not agree to the vaccination on the basis of what is reported and written by the patient. The patient is informed that vaccination can only be carried out upon signature of the informed consent “.

The lady is thus forced to report in writing on the same form “I want to vaccinate here and now, but I am not vaccinated because I have inserted the apostille that does not exempt the Italian State”.

A story that could now end up in court. The lady in fact turned to Codacons reporting the case and asking to be legally protected, and the association is studying the feasibility of a legal action against the State and the vaccination center that refused the vaccination, a circumstance that could bring about in the hands of the doctors involved in the crime of abuse of office.

“The episode demonstrates how urgent and necessary it is to change the informed consent that citizens must sign when undergoing the anti-Covid vaccination – says President Carlo Rienzi – In the presence of a vaccination obligation, the State is required by law to compensate any health damage linked to vaccination, but no mention is made of this responsibility established by our legal system in the informed consent form, which on the contrary, as formulated today, charges citizens with any risk related to the administration of the vaccine ”- concludes Rienzi.

On the grain of prophetic informed consent the virologist Andrea Crisanti. “I think that with the institution of the super Green it will” pass “as a necessary condition for work,” we are faced with a de facto vaccination obligation “. And for this reason “the super Green pass should be accompanied by a review of informed consent and a general indemnity against any undesirable effect of the vaccine”. This was the reflection of the director of the Department of Molecular Medicine of the University of Padua, on the eve of the measures that had to be discussed in the CDM and which then led to the obligation to vaccinate for those who 50.

Instead, he asks for “informed dissent”, and “signs to be posted in the vaccination points communicating that people have the possibility of receiving compensation” or “the Ministry of Health could think of advertising it in some form”. This was supported by the lawyer Maurizio Hazan, co-author of the recently published book “Responsibility, risk and damage in health care” among the leading experts in the field, which explains why the thesis supported, among others, by the doctor Andrea Crisanti, does not convince him.

“Here we are not talking about an absolute obligation, no one comes home to take you by force, as happens in compulsory health treatment – is his reasoning -. The fact that you are sanctioned if you do not vaccinate means that you are free to decide not to do it. And, if you keep the right not to do it, it means that you must be informed in order to exercise this faculty of choice which remains intact compared to how it was before the obligation “. As?

Hazan argues that we must speak of “informed dissent” in the sense that “I can choose to expose myself to a sanction instead of doing something I do not want. The sanction is aimed at free choice”. And he adds that “even if many do not know it, and Crisanti himself does not say it, in our legal system there are laws that provide for specific indemnities for adverse vaccine damage if it is shown, even if it is not easy, the connection causes – effect. And there is also the possibility, in addition to asking for compensation, to go to a judge to ask for compensation for damages, although the margin of loss is high “.

A new issue that, according to the lawyer, the pandemic proposes is therefore precisely that of informing people who have this possibility of receiving compensation. And he goes so far as to say: “One could think of putting up signs in the vaccination points that communicate this aspect or the Ministry of Health could think of advertising them in some form”.

Source link

Leave a Comment