16 family members given vaccine

is_that_so

Christy42 wrote: »

Sure they will but when you have tried front line workers you get whoever you can or you throw out the vials. They obviously focused on elderly/Hse working relatives as best they could.

Sometimes you have to make the right decision even if the optics are bad.

That sounds very like poor planning and you end up making stupid ad hoc decisions. If you don't see the issues with relatives here you really don't see the full problem.

jill_valentine

Mrsmum wrote: »

If he understood the value of not appearing to be abusing his position, then his own children would be the very last people he would call forward.

They effectively were. They dosed 100+ other people they were able to cobble together that day.

Idk maybe I'm less popular than everyone else here but I would genuinely struggle to come up with more than five names of people I could get where I work within an hour, and two are indeed related to me.

Dressoutlet

RoryMac wrote: »

It's an extra 120 doses from the supplied amount not 120 left over

I don't think people actually realise this. Its like getting 7 chicken nuggets when you paid for 6.You give 6 to the homeless people outside and eat the 7th yourself instead of throwing it in the bin. It's not left over its excess, unexpected and better to be used than thrown away

irelandrover

so this hospital had planned to do 1000 people. Due to being very careful they had an extra 120 doses so managed to find another 104 people on the list that could make the very strict time criteria to get to the hospital. After not getting a response from the HSE for another 16 doses they pulled in family member of the people working there.

So the scandal is that they had planned to vaccinate 1000 people. they managed to do 1104 people from the high prio list and when they couldn't get any more they did 16 people from the non-high prio list. 2 of whom were young and related to the master but worked at the hospital.

I agree that the master should resign at that terrible scandal.

Beechwoodspark

Bizarre story really

If he had discretion as to who should get these “spare” doses?

Why not reach out to other front line staff rather than his own family you would have to ask?

plodder

RoryMac wrote: »

It's an extra 120 doses from the supplied amount not 120 left over

which amounts to the same thing. Though it only emerged a few days ago that this was even possible. So, this talk of "corruption" or people being fired is completely ridiculous. But going forward, you'd hope this situation can be avoided with tweaked procedures and left over vials kept untouched and available for use for a few more days.

Miike

Christy42 wrote: »

Indeed for the sake of optics they should have been avoided. However from a practical point of view they were likely the furthest up the queue anyway given they worked in a hospital.

This is a question of how much we want things to look right vs how much we want things to be right.

If they worked in the hospital in an at-risk capacity. Why would they not have been included in the hospital Round A of vaccinations? or more importantly, does that mean there is other staff currently working in the Coombe who were not offered the vaccine but it was ok to farm it out to family?

None of us have all the details in clarity, but that doesn't mitigate the contempt and rage I hold for that man. There is people working in COVID units throughout the country who haven't even been as much as offered an appointment yet.

jill_valentine

is_that_so wrote: »

It would speak to very bad planning on my part if they weren't already there.

They're scrap doses. You've cobbled them together from leftovers you couldn't plan around because they're not officially there and don't come in reliable quantities. Your 16 doses have landed in your lap, after you've spent hours coming up with 100+ higher priority people.

Now what is the first call you make?

- not related
- not under 70
- within an hour of you with means to travel
- does not work with you

Christy42

is_that_so wrote: »

That sounds very like poor planning and you end up making stupid ad hoc decisions.

Yeah they are largely making this up as they go. AFAIK no vaccine has had to be rolled out country wide so rapidly before.
Systems have improved since this happened supposedly and they got 104/120 on short notice. That does not seem too bad for improvisation. Plus half marks for getting most of the remainder to secondary targets for the vaccine.

It is a little suboptimal over what we could have had but life won't order everyone outside the door to wait their turn.

Dressoutlet

plodder wrote: »

which amounts to the same thing. Though it only emerged a few days ago that this was even possible. So, this talk of "corruption" or people being fired is completely ridiculous. But going forward, you'd hope this situation can be avoided with tweaked procedures and left over vials kept untouched and available for use for a few more days.

They have to be thrown out, they're defrosted and have a strict time frame.

is_that_so

jill_valentine wrote: »

They're scrap doses. You've cobbled them together from leftovers you couldn't plan around because they're not officially there and don't come in reliable quantities. Your 16 doses have landed in your lap, after you've spent hours coming up with 100+ higher priority people.

Now what is the first call you make?

- not related
- not under 70
- within an hour of you with means to travel
- does not work with you

TBH you're creating scenarios, based on news reports. Neither you nor I know what exactly happened.

Christy42

Miike wrote: »

If they worked in the hospital in an at-risk capacity. Why would they not have been included in the hospital Round A of vaccinations? or more importantly, does that mean there is other staff currently working in the Coombe who were not offered the vaccine but it was ok to farm it out to family?

None of us have all the details in clarity, but that doesn't mitigate the contempt and rage I hold for that man. There is people working in COVID units throughout the country who haven't even been as much as offered an appointment yet.

They weren't at risk obviously. They were working in a hospital which still puts them high up the planned pecking order.

I am sure there is. I am curious how many of their personal numbers that the Coombe had immediate access to and were available to be there on short notice (remembering their jobs can't exactly be dropped at a moments notice).

jill_valentine

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Bizarre story really

If he had discretion as to who should get these “spare” doses?

Why not reach out to other front line staff rather than his own family you would have to ask?

- The vaccine can't travel
- It needs to be used in a very short window - at the point these 16 were dosed, they were down to the last hour
- They did contact the HSE to say they had spare capacity
- They had already found 100+ other frontline/high priority people to give spare doses to.

The scandal is over 16 doses, two of which went to other HSE staff, 9 of which went to over 70s, and all of which came after 100+ more urgent candidates.

Northernlily

is_that_so wrote: »

That sounds very like poor planning and you end up making stupid ad hoc decisions. If you don't see the issues with relatives here you really don't see the full problem.

Nail on the head.

hynesie08

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Bizarre story really

If he had discretion as to who should get these “spare” doses?

Why not reach out to other front line staff rather than his own family you would have to ask?

They did, they got 104 extra Healthcare workers.

is_that_so

Christy42 wrote: »

Yeah they are largely making this up as they go. AFAIK no vaccine has had to be rolled out country wide so rapidly before.
Systems have improved since this happened supposedly and they got 104/120 on short notice. That does not seem too bad for improvisation. Plus half marks for getting most of the remainder to secondary targets for the vaccine.

It is a little suboptimal over what we could have had but life won't order everyone outside the door to wait their turn.

If we're still using terms like suboptimal, even in a few weeks time, the rollout is a mess.

plodder

Dressoutlet wrote: »

They have to be thrown out, they're defrosted and have a strict time frame.

They can be kept in a regular fridge for 5 days after thawing. If they have any left over, leave them in the fridge and call the HSE the following day to send more people to use them up.

Green Peter

KaneToad wrote: »

It's the lack of judgement exercised by the medic that is the problem. He has since apologised which indicates he sees the error of his ways.

But it does raise the question about other 'little' incidents where vaccines are not ending up with the most needy first.

I have first hand knowledge of admin staff in private hospitals getting vaccines and of retired hospital workers being offered vaccines.

Also, there appears to be a plan to provide blanket vaccination coverage for entire organisations. I would question this approach... not everyone in the HSE needs to jump a queue...not everyone in the guards needs to jump a queue...not everyone in education needs to jump a queue...not everyone in the Prison service needs to jump a queue...

The most vulnerable - those at most risk of dying with the virus need to be dealt with as a priority.

110%

seamus

Miike wrote: »

None of us have all the details in clarity, but that doesn't mitigate the contempt and rage I hold for that man. There is people working in COVID units throughout the country who haven't even been as much as offered an appointment yet.

So really what you're saying here is that if frontline workers couldn't practically avail of these doses, then nobody should have, and they should have gone in the bin rather than be given to someone lower on the priority list.

Sacrificing doses in the pursuit of perfect fairness. Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Gotcha.

RoryMac

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Bizarre story really

If he had discretion as to who should get these “spare” doses?

Why not reach out to other front line staff rather than his own family you would have to ask?

Did you read the story?

They did reach out to the HSE who offered no assistance so they themselves found 104 additional people eligible for vaccination under the current criteria. The last 16 doses went to 9 or 10(reports differ) over 70's and the rest to people under 70 of different ages including the hospital master's 2 adult children.

Christy42

is_that_so wrote: »

If we're still using terms like suboptimal, even in a few weeks time, the rollout is a mess.

Given most jobs in the country have been done for years and are done suboptimally (I would put money on every job in the world if you had a microscope put on them) it seems a little harsh.

Up above you mention we don't know the full facts. That says to me outrage should be saved till we do.

jill_valentine

is_that_so wrote: »

TBH you're creating scenarios, based on news reports. Neither you nor I know what exactly happened.

I'm presenting the scenario based on what we actually know, based on news reports, yes. The alternative would be "imagining things to be mad about based on hearsay"

Dempo1

Optics certainly not good but I wondered what was a worse alternative? Waste vaccine? I'd be fine with this only if no one vulnerable or staff member lost out. I think this story along with the private hospital staff being vaccinated ahead of front line public health staff only highlights the concerning lack of management of this roll out. Minister Donnellys exasperation only deflects from his utther incompetency.

Amirani

is_that_so wrote: »

If we're still using terms like suboptimal, even in a few weeks time, the rollout is a mess.

I'd take a extensively rolled out vaccine program that is "suboptimal" every day of the week over one that is "optimal" but with more limited roll out.

Suboptimal != bad.

Miike

seamus wrote: »

So really what you're saying here is that if frontline workers couldn't practically avail of these doses, then nobody should have, and they should have gone in the bin rather than be given to someone lower on the priority list.

Sacrificing doses in the pursuit of perfect fairness. Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Gotcha.

Not what I'm saying at all and you're fully aware that it's not what I'm trying to say. I'm saying there is people throughout this country at very serious risk of contracting this virus and his story of "not being able to find people" doesn't hold water for me. I'd love to know who and how many people he contacted who were not available or unwilling to attend a clinic for vaccination.

I respect you as a quality poster on this forum but using a straw man argument to defend this embarrassing display of nepotism is low.

jill_valentine

I am genuinely concerned the Joe Duffy brigade will do their nut about this until "something is done" and the overall rollout inevitably slows down as a result.

Amirani

Miike wrote: »

Not what I'm saying at all and you're fully aware that it's not what I'm trying to say. I'm saying there is people throughout this country at very serious risk of contracting this virus and his story of "not being able to find people" doesn't hold water for me. I'd love to know who and how many people he contacted who were not available or unwilling to attend a clinic for vaccination.

We already know that the number contacted that night is well over 100. That's in addition to informing the HSE.

is_that_so

Christy42 wrote: »

Given most jobs in the country have been done for years and are done suboptimally (I would put money on every job in the world if you had a microscope put on them) it seems a little harsh.

Up above you mention we don't know the full facts. That says to me outrage should be saved till we do.

I'm not going anywhere beyond his decision, certainly not what they were doing. He made a poor one, by his own admission. I think it has the potential to cause a lot of other problems in how the public is looking at this and perception of it is very important.

Christy42

is_that_so wrote: »

I'm not going anywhere beyond his decision, certainly not what they were doing. He made a poor one, by his own admission. I think it has the potential to cause a lot of other problems in how the public is looking at this and perception of it is very important.

The at a certain point you accept optics are better than practicalities. Which is what bugs me. If someone was left waiting I would agree. If there was someone obvious who wasn't contacted I would agree. But as far as I know no one who could have easilybeen contacted gotten there and was ahead of the two sons on the vaccine list exists. Until then I can't find a flaw in the decision.

Yes it would be preferable to have someone not related from an optics point of view. But if the only way to make something look better is to make it worse than it is just idiocy and pandering to permanently outraged.

is_that_so

Amirani wrote: »

I'd take a extensively rolled out vaccine program that is "suboptimal" every day of the week over one that is "optimal" but with more limited roll out.

Suboptimal != bad.

Sub means less than and it sounds like an management excuse! What we will need to see is a working system, with the odd glitch. Too much of this suboptimal stuff will not go down well.