In a statement to the Globe, Tufts Medicine declined to comment on pending litigation, but cited federal and state government evidence that the coronavirus vaccine “does not pose a risk of severe illness, hospitalization, or death.” “It is an extremely important tool in mitigating the Mandate vaccines.
“The health and safety of our patients, visitors, and staff has always been, and will continue to be, our top priority,” the statement said.
At the time of Governor’s firing, most health care workers in Massachusetts were not required by state law to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Instead, many hospital systems, including Tufts University, Massachusetts General Brigham University, and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, have implemented their own policies. Some hospital systems have reportedly fired hundreds of employees who refused shots.
Last year, the state Public Health Council standardized vaccination requirements. This means that healthcare workers typically need to receive both the COVID-19 and influenza vaccines. But the new law allows for wider exemptions, including for religious beliefs and “personal reasons.”
Govana, who is listed as a “practicing Christian” in her application, applied for religious accommodations to the hospital’s vaccination policy in September 2021. Her opposition reportedly stemmed from concerns that the vaccine was “developed or tested using aborted fetal line cells.” suit.
“The sanctity of human life, including the unborn child, is a central tenet of my faith,” she wrote. “The use of this vaccine goes against my faith.”
During early testing and development of some COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States, researchers recreated cells originally obtained from elective abortions. None of the three coronavirus vaccines approved or authorized in the United States contain aborted fetal cells, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Many Catholic leaders, including Pope Francis, have said COVID-19 vaccinations are morally acceptable. Historical fetal cell lines have been used to create vaccines for other diseases such as hepatitis A, rubella, and rabies.
Govana’s attorney, Richard C. Chambers Jr., said the lawsuit is not challenging the efficacy or safety of the vaccine, but rather discrimination against his client’s religious beliefs.
“I’m not fighting a battle over science or politics or choice,” Chambers told the Globe on Thursday. “What I am saying is that there is a law that says you can have two exemptions. One is medical and one is religious. In this particular case, my client … I applied for that exemption and they said, ‘No, we won’t give you that exemption.’
Chambers argued that Tufts questioned the veracity of his client’s faith instead of denying the exemption on the pretext that it would create an “undue hardship” for hospital operations.
“When a client says, ‘I have deep religious beliefs,’ they say, ‘No, that’s not true, that’s not true, that’s not true.'” said the lawyer. “What more can I do?”
In January, a similar lawsuit filed by a fired nurse from Boston Medical Center was dismissed for failing to adequately explain or identify the plaintiff’s religious beliefs.
In August, a federal appeals court judge ruled in favor of the former executive director of Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital Milton, who also refused to be vaccinated for religious reasons and was fired in 2021. .
Amanda J. Bazinet, a plaintiff in the case who also represents Mr. Chambers, said the August ruling could be a watershed moment for plaintiffs like Mr. Governer.
“You can’t tell if a person has really deeply held religious beliefs,” he said. “That’s up to God and ultimately up to the jury. But you can’t just say, ‘I don’t think they have a problem’ and ignore that person’s case.” ”
This report used material from previous Globe articles.
Camilo Fonseca can be reached at camilo.fonseca@globe.com. Follow him on X @fonseca_esq Also check out our Instagram @camilo_fonseca.reports.
