Key points:
- A California nurse alleges her hospital hid data showing a surge in stillbirths among vaccinated mothers, with rates jumping from one per month to 20.
- An internal email described the spike as "demise patients," detailing graphic scenes of grieving parents and mishandled fetal remains.
- The hospital allegedly punished the whistleblower, withheld her bonus, and dismissed concerns by blaming pesticides instead of investigating.
- The lawsuit claims neonatal injuries—missing fingers, heart defects—also surged post-vaccine rollout, but hospital leadership suppressed the evidence.
- Legal action seeks to expose the truth, compel an independent investigation, and hold the hospital accountable for fraud and retaliation.
A nurse’s alarming discovery
Michelle Spencer had worked in labor and delivery for years, but by spring 2021, something felt wrong. Before COVID-19 vaccines became widely available, her unit averaged one stillbirth a month. Suddenly, that number exploded. Mothers who had recently been vaccinated were delivering lifeless babies days or weeks later. Spencer watched as the hospital’s third floor became a revolving door of grief.
Then came the email. In September 2022, perinatal nurse manager Julie Christopherson warned staff of a relentless tide of "demise patients"—22 in August alone, matching a grim record set the year before. "It’s a lot of work for you," Christopherson wrote, acknowledging the emotional toll. The note included disturbing details: parents begging for autopsies, tiny bodies mishandled, and a workload so overwhelming that bereavement care overshadowed everything else. Spencer saved the email, realizing it was proof of a pattern no one wanted to name.
The hospital’s cover-up
The lawsuit paints a damning picture. As stillbirths climbed, the hospital allegedly pushed vaccines aggressively, even requiring OB-GYNs to administer them without disclosing potential risks. Meanwhile, internal data reportedly showed nearly all fetal deaths occurred in vaccinated mothers, while unvaccinated rates stayed flat.
When Spencer raised alarms, supervisors dismissed her. "Pesticides," they suggested, were a more likely culprit than the vaccines. Yet the neonatal ICU told another story—babies born with missing digits, heart murmurs, and jaundice at rates never seen before. The hospital, the suit claims, ignored these "safety signals" while reaping financial incentives for vaccine promotion.
A study published in the peer-reviewed journal Science, Public Health Policy and the Law, flagged several concerning signals, including miscarriage, preeclampsia, cervical insufficiency, chromosomal abnormalities, fetal malformations, premature birth, stillbirth, newborn asphyxia, and newborn death.
Retaliation and a fight for transparency
Spencer’s decision to share the email with journalists triggered a backlash. The hospital launched what she calls a "sham investigation," stripped her of a $5,000 bonus, and warned other staff against speaking out. Even California’s public health agency was allegedly misled, with officials told vaccines played no role in the deaths.
Now, Spencer is fighting to force an independent review. "The hospital chose financial gain over people’s lives," her attorney, Greg Glaser, said. The lawsuit, backed by Children’s Health Defense, seeks not just justice for Spencer, but a spotlight on what she calls "the evil in the hospital system." For parents and nurses alike, the case raises a haunting question: How many warnings were ignored before lives were lost?
Sources include:
ChildrensHealthDefense.org [PDF]
Please contact us for more information.
