California hospital accused of coverup in the wake of vaccine-linked stillbirth surge
By ljdevon // 2025-08-11
Copy
 
In a world where trust in healthcare is a fragile yet sacred bond, it’s disheartening to discover a breach of that trust in the form of a cover-up. Michelle Spencer, a nurse at Community Regional Medical Center in Fresno, California, has found herself at the crossroads of duty and silence. Since the spring of 2021, a worrying trend has emerged at the hospital: a sharp increase in stillbirths among vaccinated mothers. Spencer’s persistent questioning and whistle blowing have brought this unsettling reality to light, forcing a conversation that the hospital had long tried to avoid. Imagine a mother-to-be, hopeful and ready to embrace her new life, only to be greeted by the sting of an unintended consequence. The alarming spike in stillbirths following the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines has left both parents and professionals alike reeling, questioning the very fabric of medical integrity. The hospital’s response to these tragic outcomes has been unsettling, to say the least. Now, Spencer’s whistleblower lawsuit not only challenges the hospital’s actions but also raises profound questions about the transparency of medical institutions in an era where trust is increasingly hard-won. Key points:
  • A dramatic increase in stillbirths occurred at Community Regional Medical Center following the COVID-19 vaccination rollout.
  • Nurse Michelle Spencer reports data showing nearly all stillbirths were in vaccinated mothers, which the hospital suppressed.
  • Hospital management blamed the spike on factors like pesticides and launched an internal investigation into Spencer.
  • Spencer seeks lost wages, punitive damages, and an independent investigation into the deaths.

The whistleblower’s story

Michelle Spencer, a nurse at Community Regional Medical Center since 2017, noticed a chilling pattern in spring 2021. Before the vaccines were rolled out, the hospital saw about one stillbirth per month. But following the push for vaccinations among pregnant women, that number skyrocketed to approximately 20 per month. Spencer, armed with internal data showing nearly all stillbirths were in vaccinated mothers, felt an overwhelming responsibility to speak out. When she raised her concerns, the hospital’s response was anything but supportive. Management dismissed her worries, attributing the spike in fetal deaths to unrelated causes like pesticides, a claim that seems as far-fetched as it is convenient. Internal emails obtained by Spencer reveal a nurse manager acknowledging the rise in "demise patients," including 22 stillbirths in a single month, without mentioning the vaccines. The silence surrounding the link between vaccines and stillbirths was deafening. Spencer’s persistence eventually led to retaliation. She was denied a $5,000 retention bonus, and management reprimanded her for discussing vaccine risks with patients. The hospital launched an internal investigation into her actions, an ironic move that only solidified her resolve. "The essence of this case is that the truth shall set you free," Greg Glaser, Spencer’s attorney, explains. "The hospital possessed vaccinated versus unvaccinated comparison data. The numbers proved the vaccines were causing miscarriages and more in the vaccinated group."

The case

The complaint by Michelle Spencer against Community Medical Centers (CMC) and its associated entities (Defendant) pertains to systemic fraud, unlawful retaliation, and the suppression of critical medical data that reveals increased rates of unborn baby deaths due to the Defendant's workplace policies. Spencer, a Registered Nurse at CMC's Community Regional Medical Center (CRMC), witnessed the exponential rise in unborn baby deaths and observed CMC's deliberate concealment of patient injury data. Spencer exposed this data out of concern for patient safety and subsequently faced retaliation from CMC. The case is filed in the Superior Court of California, Fresno County, due to the employment and alleged retaliation locality. The court has jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief and the amount of damages sought qualifies the court for unlimited civil case jurisdiction.

General allegations

  • Covid-19 vaccine policy impact: Before Spring 2021, the hospital environment at CRMC was calm. However, following CMC’s policies on vaccine distribution, particularly the promotion of Covid-19 vaccines to pregnant women, the third floor transformed into a difficult and overrun unit.
  • Increase in unborn baby deaths: Beginning in Spring 2021, Spencer estimated a 400-500% increase in unborn baby deaths (from approximately one or two per month to about four per week). Evidence suggests a correlation between vaccination and these high numbers.
  • CEOs and executives' involvement: CMC's top executives were aware of the increased trend in maternal and fetal complications following vaccination. Despite this, CMC aggressively promoted vaccinations, especially those administered by OBGYNs with hospital privileges, without disclosing risks or benefits. Moreover, CMC concealed internal data on vaccine-related injuries.
  • Retaliatory actions: Spencer initiated a call for investigations following the dissemination of the "Record High Dead Babies Email" (Exhibit A), which detailed the rise in unborn baby deaths. Immediately post this, Spencer suffered retaliation, losing her retention bonus and career reputation at the hands of management.
Following her whistle blowing, Spencer experienced explicit actions by CMC to silence and isolate her:
  • December 7, 2022: Spencer met with CMC management, questioning why the focus was on investigating her rather than probing the cause of the rising baby deaths.
  • December 22, 2022: She emailed CMC Human Resources, urging action, but her appeals were rebuffed. Management instead created a pretense that she was not in good standing, which endangered her current job and future career advancement prospects.
  • Adverse Employment Actions: She was denied her earned $5,000 retention bonus and received a baseless "Final Written Warning." Additionally, her standing status was downgraded, impacting her professional reputation.
  • CMC's workplace environment promoted an illogical and dogmatic support for vaccines, driven by financial gain rather than by data and observation.
  • CMC management minimized the importance of Plaintiff's observations and complaints, disrespecting her nurse ethical obligation to "do no harm."
  • CMC provided misleading or false information to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), denying that the high numbers of unborn baby deaths were linked to the aggressive Covid-19 vaccination policies.
  • The Regulator's failure to conduct a good faith investigation and CMC’s concealment of the data created barriers to transparency and sanitation of public health concerns.
  • CMC knowingly deceived Plaintiff and other staff members about the risks of the vaccines and concealed critical data on vaccine-associated fetal deaths.
  • By misleading and concealing the truth, CMC is accused of causing substantial harm, financial losses, and threats to personal safety and professional reputations.
  • CMC retaliated against Plaintiff for disclosing critical and harmful information regarding vaccine risks and failing to take adequate measures to protect patients. This included losing lucrative benefits, facing professional scrutiny, and experiencing a career setback.
  • CMC engaged in unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business acts to prioritize financial gains and foster an environment of silence about the risks associated with vaccination. By so doing, CMC acted unethically and violated various laws, including informed consent/refusal laws and fraud.

Request for relief

Plaintiff requests: General and special damages: Including economic losses, lost bonuses, and reputational harm. Punitive damages: To deter future misconduct and provide compensation. Injunctive reliefs: Including orders requiring CMC to:
  • Pay for an independent third-party investigation and analysis of the medical data.
  • Report all unborn baby deaths to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
  • Cease coercive administration policies.
  • Attorney Fees: To compensate for the legal expenses incurred.

A call for an independent investigation

Spencer’s lawsuit against the hospital is now in the hands of the Superior Court of California, Fresno County. She’s not just seeking financial recompense; she’s fighting for the recognition of the truth. The hospital’s decision to suppress vaccinated versus unvaccinated data has left professionals like Spencer struggling to fulfill their ethical obligations. How can a nurse ethically inform patients about their risks when the institution she works for refuses to acknowledge the very issue? An independent investigation is paramount to uncover the complete story behind these stillbirths. The data the hospital has concealed could provide critical insights into the vaccines’ long-term effects on pregnant women. Translucency in the medical community is essential, yet it has been sorely lacking in this case. "We’ve seen instances in the past where institutions have tried to downplay or outright deny unusual health trends," says Dr. Emily Thompson, a public health expert. "Spencer’s courage in bringing this issue to light is something we should all commend." The power of an independent investigation lies in its ability to restore trust. Patients deserve to know the risks associated with their medical decisions, and healthcare professionals need the tools to ethically guide them. Without transparency, the chain of trust in healthcare can easily break, leaving those most vulnerable—like pregnant women—reeling in the wake of misinformation and concealment. In a world where information can seem overwhelming and the truth elusive, Spencer’s story is a reminder of the importance of trust and transparency in healthcare. It’s a call to action, not just for an independent investigation but for a collective reflection on the systems that govern our medical institutions. Sources include: SharylAttkinsson.com ChildrensHealthDefense.org ChildrensHealthDefense.org [PDF]
Copy