Diakonie Stetten calls for two-class vaccinations to be abolished! – Rems-Murr district

That’s enough for the Diakonie Stetten board: In an open letter, Pastor Rainer Hinzen and his deputy Dietmar Prexl are shaking up the requirement for two-class vaccinations, which only applies to medicine and care, but not to the rest of the population. All or nothing, this is their demand, backed by tons of arguments.

You are not alone in this. Even before it was introduced in March, the institutional immunization obligation sparked a great deal of indignation (we reported). Just two examples from February …

“To date, we have not had a single positive case among local residents since the start of the pandemic,” said Alexander Flint of the Kronenhof Großerlach retirement home. “Unvaccinated workers also contributed to this phenomenal result, diligently supporting the activities we requested. Signing these people that they are becoming personae non gratae is cheesy. ‘

“We would like a general obligation to vaccinate in time,” explained Sibylle Kessel, spokeswoman for the Großheppach sisters. The very selection of several groups has a “provocative” effect and causes “a lot of frustration, because after two years in an exceptional mode, the nursing staff is often in the ears”. Sarcastically saying, “We care for your parents and we need to get vaccinated for it – until then you can go to anti-vaccine demonstrations.”

Karl Lauterbach and Hubertus Heil, please read

The Diaconia’s open letter – addressed to Bundestag members in the region and to federal ministers Karl Lauterbach (health) and Hubertus Heil (work) – now lends a strong voice to this widespread anger. Hinzen and Prexl call for an “end to unequal treatment”. At present, the vast majority of society is not only spared the vaccination obligation, but is also exempt from “almost all general protective measures” “due to the falling number of cases” – only in medicine and care, this is not the case.

The company Diakonie “made every effort to meet the requirements.” Despite “considerable bureaucratic effort to collect and share data in addition to the day-to-day corona crisis management tasks.” Despite “constantly changing information and requirements regarding the timely fulfillment of our reporting obligations.” Despite “dissatisfaction that part of our workforce has faced institutional immunization requirements.” Despite the “high risk that the care and support of people with disabilities and caring needs can no longer be guaranteed if the health authorities issue comprehensive operating bans.” The protection of the defenseless is an important goal – Diakonie implements it “with great effort”, “with regular informational and educational campaigns, numerous offers of internal vaccinations and the enormous personal commitment of our managers”. Result: Vaccination rates “among our employees” “continue to rise” and “recently reached over 90 percent”.

Annoying inconsistency: does politics pinch?

Big but: “We made it clear right from the start that we believed that an institution-related vaccination requirement could only be the first step towards a general vaccination requirement.” Only this can “make an effective contribution to the protection of vulnerable groups in the long term”.

Because employees “are not the only ones who potentially transmit the virus to facilities.” The people who live there and the people who come to visit “can be the starting point of the chain of infection.”

And therefore conditions should not be “limited to objects” and the people who work there, but must be applied to society as a whole. ” In any case, the “relatively small benefit” of partial vaccination is no longer proportional to the “high effort”.

Corona needs: sick leaves and sick leaves

The workforce grows increasingly evil: “they are already bearing a large part of the burden and responsibility for overcoming” the corona crisis, and “after more than two years of the pandemic, they have reached the end of their strength.” Exhaustion and frustration have led to “a significant increase in sick leave” but also to “some layoffs”.

How is it possible that the rest of the republic can now do what they want, nurses “who have not yet been vaccinated” but “are still at risk of being banned”? Vaccination is compulsory for caregivers, but not for those entrusted to them – how to “pass it on”? Why “objects are still treated as a” special world “when there are practically no limits anywhere else in society?” The activity bans will come – perhaps shortly before this partial vaccination obligation “at the end of the year” will end anyway?

And Hinzen and Prexl also ask a very fundamental question: “In the face of a shortage of skilled workers, can society afford to do without skilled workers?”

Either – or: the key postulate of diaconia

The letter ends with a crystal-clear demand: politicians should either “restart compulsory immunization” “in good time” before fall – “or, failing that, consistently suspend site-related mandatory immunization entirely to avoid frustration among staff to avoid frustration. not to be enlarged any further and to spare all those involved disproportionately additional efforts ”. Under no circumstances should “the expected worsening of the infectious disease situation in the fall be re-applied to the backs of the nursing staff as politicians are unable to reach a consensus on general vaccination.”

Leave a Comment