Connect with us

Maine

Maine school nurses raise concerns about new vaccine reporting system

Published

on

Maine school nurses raise concerns about new vaccine reporting system


School nurses from across the state have raised concerns about a new vaccine reporting system rolled out this year by the Maine Department of Education and Maine Center for Disease Control.

A letter signed by 70 school nurses statewide that was shared with lawmakers and Gov. Janet Mills last Friday lays out three primary concerns: added time and effort burden for nurses on top of regular duties, concerns about student privacy, and a “mismatch” of state policies around vaccine records.

“While we fully support the importance of protecting public health and ensuring accurate immunization records, we are deeply concerned about the burdens and risks this system places on schools, school nurses, and families,” the letter reads.

State officials said they have responded to the concerns from school nurses by extending the deadline for this year’s annual report, making changes to the system to make reporting easier and providing assistance to schools in adjusting to the program. They said the system is compliant with state and federal privacy laws, and is intended to improve reporting and record-keeping of immunization data.

Advertisement

“The Maine DOE and the Maine CDC will continue to seek and incorporate feedback from school nurses and other school staff as this transition progresses,” the departments said in a joint statement Thursday.

This week, school nurses from around the state told the Press Herald that they feel state officials don’t understand the work they do, and are underestimating the burden of adding time-consuming administrative tasks to their plates.

“We’ve worked so hard, and then we find out that this program includes a tremendous amount of administrative work, and there are just no hours left in the day,” said Jennifer Bowdish, a school nurse from Brunswick.

Maine officials announced last April they would be rolling out Docket for Schools, a reporting module for student immunization records, during the 2025-26 school year.

State law requires students enrolled in public and private schools to show proof of vaccination, and in 2021 a new state policy eliminated religious and philosophical exemptions. It also requires district superintendents to maintain uniform records of the immunization status of every student and submit a summary report to the state by Dec. 15 each year.

Advertisement

In a June memo, the education department said that report was often “incomplete, erroneous, or not received.” During the 2023-24 school year, only 77% of schools submitted the survey, and 39% of those who did had at least one missing student record.

The new system was adopted to ensure uniform record-keeping and thorough data.

NURSES SOUND THE ALARM

A group of school nurses first raised concerns in a mid-September letter to the commissioner of education, and in response the state’s school nurse consultant and the director of the Maine Immunization Program held a meeting to answer questions.

But concerns persisted and the group of nurses responded by sending a letter to lawmakers.

Advertisement

“We barely scrape by getting the work done that we need to,” Bowdish, from Brunswick, said. She sees 50 students daily and administers more than 20 medications. “You’re doing the work of a nurse and of an administrative assistant. For some kids in your school, you are the only health provider that they are ever going to see.”

One of the biggest frustrations nurses have with the new system is that school nurses don’t actually give immunizations. They are usually administered by a pediatrician, but the program requires the nurses to input original records from the student’s primary care provider, which are often full of small clerical errors made by those offices, made several years earlier.

“We’re being asked to create a database about work we didn’t do,” said Denise Leathers-Pouliot, a school nurse in Monmouth.

Sarah Sartory is the school nurse at Fryeburg Academy, a private school minutes from the New Hampshire border, and said hundreds of her students are now “noncompliant” because that state’s immunization program isn’t compatible with Maine’s. She can’t access work that has already been done to collect vaccine records in New Hampshire. Instead, she’s responsible for pulling the original immunization files from doctors’ offices for every student.

“This is time that I just don’t have,” Sartory said. “I don’t see the benefit to the students. I don’t see the benefit to our school. It’s a hindrance to school nurses.”

Advertisement

In their letter to lawmakers, the nurses wrote that the comprehensive, personally identifying data required by Docket for Schools, “raises concerns about overreach and unnecessary data exposure” because state statute only requires summary reports.

Several nurses said that since the COVID-19 pandemic, they have felt overburdened with work, and had to rebuild relationships with families that eroded during that tense period. They’re concerned that parents didn’t give informed consent to have detailed personal information be uploaded to a third-party platform.

AGENCIES RESPOND

In response to last week’s letter, state agencies announced they had extended the deadline for the annual immunization report to February, added a new feature to the system that will allow nurses to add or remove students without redoing the entire roster, and said that school staff are no longer responsible for correcting errors made by primary care offices.

Other efforts include live assistance with the record review and upload process, and on-site visits if requested.

Maine’s Departments of Education and Health and Human Services said in a joint statement that the user agreement only allows the release of records in compliance with federal privacy laws.

Advertisement

They also noted that personally identifiable data can only be accessed at the school level, while state officials can only view aggregate-level data.

The agency spokespeople said the third-party platform will ensure the summary reports are thorough and accurate by automating the review process, and that real-time record keeping will be essential to the Maine CDC in the case of an outbreak.

“Following the transition to Docket, it will mean less work for schools and easier record keeping, including when students move between schools,” they said.

For now, nurses said the program feels like reinventing the wheel with no benefit. Sartory, from Fryeburg, said she appreciates that the state extended the report deadline, but is still frustrated that the burden of transition has fallen to nurses.

“That still doesn’t mean I have more hours in my day,” she said.

Advertisement



Source link

Maine

Who is raising the most money in the Maine governor’s race?

Published

on

Who is raising the most money in the Maine governor’s race?


Republican primary candidate for Maine Governor Jonathan Bush during a news conference in Welcome Center of Maine State House in Augusta on March 17.
(Joe Phelan/Staff Photographer)

Candidates vying to become Maine’s next governor have until midnight Tuesday to file campaign finance reports for the first quarter of the year.

The reports will show who is best positioned to control the message in the final month-plus until the primaries. But fundraising success doesn’t always guarantee a win at the ballot box.

The reports come as a growing number of leading candidates are taking to the airwaves a head of the June 9 primaries. Five Democrats and seven Republicans are vying to replace Gov. Janet Mills, who is term limited.

Advertisement

As of Tuesday, Republican Jonathan Bush topped all candidates in broadcast, cable and digital advertising, having booked nearly $1.5 million in ads through the primary, the political spending tracker AdImpact said.

But Republican Garrett Mason is benefitting from about $3 million in spending by Restoration of America PAC, which is running ads targeting Gov. Janet Mills and tying Mason to President Donald Trump.

Other Republican candidates running ads are Bobby Charles ($63,000), Owen McCarthy ($43,660) and Ben Midgely ($55,000.)

Hannah Pingree tops the Democratic slate with about $564,000 in ad spending, followed by Nirav Shah ($493,000), Shenna Bellows ($462,700) and Angus King III ($299,000.)

As of Tuesday afternoon, fundraising totals were only trickling in. Public access to those reports was hampered because the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices is building a new website, and glitches made some reports unviewable.

Advertisement

This story will be updated when more reports are filed. As of Tuesday afternoon:

  • Republican Jonathan Bush reported raising about $845,000 in the first quarter, but 60% of that, $500,000, was a personal loan to his own campaign. His totals were not yet available through the new website, but his quarterly fundraising and spending was provided by ethics staff.
  • Republican Robert Wessels was the only other active candidate that had filed. He raised nearly $11,600 for the quarter and has about $13,540 in cash.

This is a developing story.



Source link

Continue Reading

Maine

Obituary: Anne Theresa Tarling

Published

on

Obituary: Anne Theresa Tarling


Anne Theresa Tarling

SANFORD – Anne Theresa Tarling, 74, of Sanford, Maine passed away peacefully at home on April 23, 2026, surrounded by her loving family. While our hearts are broken, we find comfort in knowing she lived a full and beautiful life rooted in love, creativity, and devotion to the people who meant the most to her.

Anne was born on April 3, 1952, in Portland, Maine, to the late Joseph and Blanche Morin. She grew up in Portland and graduated from Deering High School in 1970.

In 1980, Anne married the love of her life, Ernest Tarling. Together they built a life centered on family, laughter, and partnership. Their 45 years of marriage were filled with shared memories and a deep commitment to one another and to their family.

Advertisement

Anne was a talented self-taught artist who found great joy in painting and sharing her creativity with others. She proudly exhibited her work at local art shows and specialty shops, and her paintings found their way into homes near and far. Her art brought beauty and comfort to many and will continue to remind us of her for years to come.

She also enjoyed gardening, sailing the coast of Maine, and hosting family gatherings. She was known for her famous chocolate chip cookies and for never missing a birthday or special occasion.

Being a devoted Nana brought her great joy, and she cherished time spent with her family above all else.

In addition to her parents, Anne was preceded in death by her brother, Stephen Morin; her sister, Julie Pochebit, her brother-in-law, Daniel Desmond; nieces Elizabeth McKee and Alison Pochebit.

She is survived by her brother, Paul (Sue Ellen) Morin, two sisters, Cheryl Desmond and Celine (Stephen) Pochebit; her husband of 45 years, Ernest Tarling; her son, Greg (Karen) Flagg, her four daughters, Jennifer Copper, Rebecca (Frank) Zavadil, Stefenie (Matthew) Burdick, and Kendra (Justin) Dowling; her 11 grandchildren, Cody, Matthew, Jackson, Gracey, Lucas, Quinn, Beau, Shea, Ellie, Will, and Stevie; a large extended family, including many loving nieces and nephews; and her longtime best friend, Sandy Hobbs.

Advertisement

A funeral service will be held Saturday, May 2, at 11 a.m. at St. Martha Church, 30 Portland Road, Kennebunk, Maine, followed by a celebration of life at 12:30 p.m. at For the Love of Food + Drink at Saltwater Farm, 411 Post Road, Wells, Maine.

To share a memory or leave a message of condolence, please visit Anne’s Book of Memories Page at http://www.bibberfuneral.com.

Arrangements are in the care of Bibber Memorial Chapel, 67 Summer Street, Kennebunk, ME 04043.





Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Maine

Moldy Maine weed is being treating with radiation

Published

on

Moldy Maine weed is being treating with radiation


Jars of cannabis flowers are shown in June 2020 at a shop in Hallowell. (Joe Phelan/Staff Photographer)

Maine marijuana growers are increasingly using radiation and other methods to remove contaminants from their products, a process consumers are likely in the dark about.

Despite a state policy requiring remediated products to be labeled as such, Maine’s Office of Cannabis Policy is not enforcing that rule.

In response to a complaint by a dispensary owner in late February, deputy director of operations Vern Malloch acknowledged, “we are not requiring labeling of remediated or treated product,” according to records obtained through a media request.

Advertisement

“We plan to issue guidance on this in the near future,” Malloch wrote.

Office of Cannabis Policy Director John Hudak also told lawmakers last year that the agency hasn’t enforced remediation labeling requirements since at least November 2024.

“The Office began receiving pushback from cannabis cultivators who did not want to label their cannabis if they ‘treated’ their cannabis with radiation or ozone prior to submitting the cannabis for mandatory testing,” Hudak wrote in testimony last year.

A spokesperson for the agency declined to answer specific questions Monday, but confirmed the agency stopped enforcing the rule after some growers raised concerns over the “misleading impact” that labeling treated cannabis has on consumers.

“Requiring label disclosure of the use of irradiation or ozone treatment implies a consumer risk that is not scientifically supported and is potentially misleading in its implication about potential harm from exposure,” Alexis Soucy, OCP’s director of media relations, wrote in an email.

Advertisement

Over the last couple years, several marijuana products have been subjected to recall because of high levels of mold, yeast and other contaminants. Unsafe levels of mold in cannabis can cause flu-like symptoms, including respiratory issues, sinus infections, headaches and dizziness.

But rather than tossing their product, growers can turn to a process called irradiation, often involving gamma rays or X-rays, to remove contaminants.

Supporters say it’s a safe way to reduce waste and prolong shelf lives. Mold and yeast grow naturally just about everywhere and many species are benign. Standard cannabis mold testing does not differentiate between harmful and harmless microbes.

Opponents, however, argue there isn’t enough research about remediating cannabis to say whether it’s safe or not. There is not much data on whether the various types of remediation are effective at killing microbes or are safe for consumers, most of whom don’t know about the practice.

“It’s a complex topic without many answers,” said Yasha Kahn, who co-founded MCR Labs, one of four licensed cannabis testing facilities in Maine. “Hopefully, the rescheduling can lead to more research.”

Advertisement

The federal government moved last week to reclassify cannabis from a Schedule I to Schedule III drug. Decades-long restrictions on cannabis research will be lifted, which acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said will allow for studies into “marijuana’s safety and efficacy.”

Kahn, who operates several testing labs throughout New England, said irradiating cannabis has become increasingly prevalent in legal markets across the country and the world. It’s still debated whether irradiation works as well as it’s supposed to, he said.

‘THIS IS A FAIRLY NEW PROCESS’

There are numerous kinds of cannabis remediation, each with its own pros and cons. Growers most commonly use X-rays, gamma radiation or ozone gas to remove mold and microbes.

Radiation does not kill all the mold, yeast and other microbes present in cannabis outright, Kahn said. Certain species of mold, like harmful mycotoxins, can often survive remediation. Others can remain dormant for months following the procedure.

“Irradiation gets rid of mold’s ability to procreate, and not necessarily permanently,” he said. “You can take that same product and test it again, months from then, and there’s going to be mold growth.”

Advertisement

Some in the industry, like organic marijuana farmer Lizzy Hayes in Mercer, fear that having the option to remediate cannabis removes the incentive to grow clean cannabis. If you can simply use radiation to eliminate mold from harvested crops, she said, why would you put effort into growing mold-free products?

Part of the blame, according to Hayes, lies at the feet of Maine’s recreational cannabis testing regime. Unlike the state’s medical marijuana market, batches of recreational cannabis products must be tested for contaminants like mold, yeast and heavy metals before they can be put on a dispensary shelf.

But since the mold test only detects the presence of mold, not whether it’s harmful, Hayes said many growers save themselves the trouble and irradiate their cannabis by default rather than risking a failed test.

“When you have a regulatory system that incentivizes irradiation, it’s also making it so that customers don’t have access to as high quality of a product,” she said.

Some in the industry disagree. A bill was proposed last year to codify requirements around labeling treated cannabis and inspecting remediation equipment. It was ultimately defeated after many Maine cannabis growers testified in opposition to the bill.

Advertisement

“Radiation and ozone treatment methods are well-established, scientifically validated technologies commonly used in industries far beyond cannabis,” wrote Jacob Racioppi, owner of Goose River Cannabis in Unity. “In fact, they are standard in the food industry.”

Joel Pepin, co-founder of JAR Cannabis Company, owns and operates one of about a dozen X-ray machines in Maine’s cannabis industry. He estimated that about half of Maine’s recreational cannabis has been treated by similar methods. It would be overkill, he said, to require all of that product to be labeled over scientifically unfounded concerns.

“If we apply this same logic to other industries in Maine, then why doesn’t this bill also require dental patients to wear a shirt that says, ‘treated by X-ray’ after leaving the dental office?” Pepin testified.

Neither Racioppi nor Pepin responded to requests for an interview.

Lorri Maling, laboratory director at cannabis testing facility Nelson Analytical, seconded Pepin that remediating cannabis is “more in use now than it was a few years ago.”

Advertisement

While some opponents of irradiation claim the process reduces THC content and eliminates terpenes — the chemicals that give different cannabis strains unique scents and effects — Maling said there’s no data to back that up. Nor is there much data to back up many other conclusions about the effects of irradiating cannabis.

Most of the studies on the effects of irradiation have been on fruits and vegetables, she said, which have not shown any negative effects — though there’s no guarantee that any remediation method will kill all bacteria.

“This is a fairly new process for cannabis,” Maling wrote in an email. “I really cannot say that it is safe or unsafe for cannabis as there really is not enough data on this.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending