I recently read an article on ValpoLife about Porter Hospital temporarily altering their visitor policy and asked myself the question: what is the cost of prevention?
The flu season is in full swing and from the looks of things it is spreading very quickly. With the the current flu flare-up and the threat of the swine flu hovering around us all of the time Porter decided it was in the best interest of their patients and the community to disallow children under the age of 18 to visit patients in the hospital.
A quote from Taffy Arias, Porter’s Chief Nursing Officer:
“Children and young adults are particularly vulnerable to this new flu, and we know from seasonal flu that children are often the source of influenza outbreaks,” explains Taffy Arias, Porter’s Chief Nursing Officer. “By limiting child visitors, we are attempting to protect vulnerable patients from exposure to H1N1 and thereby complicating their hospital stay.”
I don’t have a particularly strong feeling on this subject either way, but do feel that this is a bit much. I believe that asking all visitors to wear masks and to sanitize their hands before entering a patient’s room would be sufficient. I am not sure that stopping a few cases of the flu is worth banning children from the hospital especially if the patient is the parent or guardian of a child that simply wishes to see their loved ones.
I can see that this could be a polarizing debate and would love to hear what you have to say about it. Leave a comment below to discuss your thoughts.
Thanks to ValpoLife for bringing this article to my attention. If you don’t already follow them on twitter @valpolife I suggest you start.
 | Subscribe to Custom Data Services, Inc. Medical Billing: by RSS or by Email |
This is a tough one because I could see either side of the debate as being plausible. However, I am against banning people from the hospital because often times people are the source of joy that their loves one needs to get better, especially children.
I would agree that wearing the mask and washing hands would be a more effective way to counteract the flu season than telling people that they cannot go into the hospital. And when is this ban going to end? At the end of flu season, next year, never?
I don’t think that prevention should be taken this far, but know that something can be done. I remember being in the waiting room and this woman had her 3 or 4 year old child in there. He had a cold. But she had not taught him how to sneeze and cover his mouth when he did it.
In fact, when he sneezed, he arched his back, leaned his head back, and projected the sneeze as far as he could. I had to get up and move from them cause that was just ridiculous.
I don’t doubt that it was instances like this that lead to such a ban, but that parent needed to be chastised and the child ordered to wear a mask to stop the spread of germs.
Nevertheless, I am still against a total ban from the hospital.
While I agree that children make the patients feel warm and fuzzy inside, this is a hospital. SCIENCE IS UNDERWAY. This is not the place to be feeling warm and fuzzy inside. If you feel fuzzy inside, we will need to perform exploratory surgery to determine the cause and texture of that fuzziness. Perhaps some type of fungus somehow digging their chitinous hyphae through your internal organs? Maybe the patient has swallowed some carpeting? Things must be evaluated, and problems must be solved. This is no time for mood and emotions. Leave the kids at home.
I realize I’m very late with this reply, however, I would like to comment. Porter’s ban was responsible for two children I know being denied the chance to say good-bye to a cherished grandparent.
Of course I realize that some patients are at higher risk, but a conscientious doctor should be able to determine that on a case by case basis. Universal precautions should be all that are necessary.
Candy,
My thoughts exactly. You can’t just blanket the world to stop the potential spread of disease. You have got to recognize threats and treat them on an individual basis.
Adam