to be worried about this consent form?

[LightShinesInTheDarkness]

DD (12) has brought home the NHS Consent form for the HPV Immunisation for Year 8s.

We have decided, in a discussion involving me, DD and DH, that we do not want her to have the vaccine.

However, I am upset that the form says : (quote) Please note that while your consent is important, if you refuse consent the vaccination may still be given

It also says, 'Reason consent refused (PTO for additional space to give us your reason for your decision' - do I really have to give details?

AIBU to feel concerned?

This is a Washington Times article about Gardasil, the US HPV vaccine, and reported side-effects.

FDA expands Gardasil warnings

Yes take your point Valhala , but she probably just phrased it badly. She had to accept my decision because I certainly wasn't changing it .I expect it was a form filling exercise!

ive not been called by my dds school nurse yet and the other girls had their injection on MOnday

Ah. See I don't find that appalling at all Vallhala.

If I'd refused something because I was under a misapprehension then I'd welcome a nurse calling. If I hadn't been under a misapprehension then nothing lost.

Jena, it's just me, I won't have my decisions challenged, I won't have people assume that I haven't given an important matter thought and done my homework and I won't be told!

Besides, I'm poorly today so am even more stroppy than normal!

"Jena, it's just me, I won't have my decisions challenged"
How ever do you cope on MN then, nevermind AIBU ?

Valhalla Couldn't agree more

:o mama

Are you questioning me? Was that a challenge???

Pass the lemsip Vallhala I am dying too :(

nomedoit, (a) you do know the difference between the Washington Post and the Washington Times, don't you? (b) that relates to Gardasil, which the NHS isn't using and (c) "joint and muscle pain, fatigue, physical weakness and general malaise." will be found in the notes for every drug, pretty much, because it'll have been reported for every drug, pretty much.

fatigue, physical weakness and general malaise was pretty much my default state when I was 13...

We don't ask about whether children want other health vaccinations, I'm sure I understand the difference here as that is ultimately what this is.

My PCT's form is in front of me. It does not mention giving the vaccine without consent, and it simply says "if, after discussion, you and your daughter decent you do not want her to have the vaccine, it would be helpful if you would give the reason for this on the back of this form and return (in the envelope provided) to school."

There a health questionaire, which closes down all the "ah, they don't know about..."

And the children have been told that their parents might decide to get Gardasil privately, and why (which is a school with a lot of doctors amongst the parents).

Returning to typing after the visit of our GP neighbour whose daughter is in the same cohort as mine, she explains the longevity thing thusly. Cervical cancer is a disease of pre-menopausal women. The ramp-up time for cancer is ten to fifteen years from infection. A vaccine that will be protective for twenty years will probably mean that the window of risk is very small, although as the average age of menopause rises that may change. Moreover, in twenty years the amount of HPV ambient in the population will be falling, so the chances of being infected later are much smaller.

nomedoit - your quote from Washington Post of July 2008 - I think that those side effects are the same for Cevarix as on the nhs website - including difficulty breathing and collapse

haven't read the whole thread, not sure if this has alreadyu been linked to about Gardasil and Cervarix,

Gardasil Researcher Drops A Bombshell

At least 3 people on this thread have overestimated the prevalence of cervical cancer. It isn't even in the top ten most common cancers in women. We are more likely to get breast, lung, bowel,ovarian, uterine, pancreatic, kidney, skin cancers, lymphoma and leukaemia than cervical.

These over-estimations show how powerful the publicity around this vaccine has been.

mamatomy- you cannot force your child to have the vaccine against thier will if they are 'Gillick competant'. A rational child has the legal right to refuse any medical treatment, even if it potentially life-saving.

My DD is too young now, but I will not consent when she is 12. If when she is older, and fully understands all the issues I wont object to her deciding to have it. I think it a decision for a young woman to make herself not for her parents to impose on her.

The main reason I have against this vaccine is that I think it is naive to think that girls who've had it will be as reliable at going for their smears. A lot will think "I've had the jab, I'm safe, I don't need a smear". They'll forget that it doesn't protect against 30% of cervical cancer strains. If the smear rate goes down we may actually see the death rate from cervical cancer increase in 20-40 years, because of the false sense of security this vaccine creates.

I'm sure the kind of Mums who come on here will remind their daughters to still have smears but millions of people in this country are ignorant of basic health facts, and they will be the ones most at risk.

claig, no it hasn't. I found that article very informative. It quotes 44 deaths which was news to me. How many parents know that? I absolutely believe that the marketing of this particular vaccine has been driven by financial motives which is NOT to say the vaccine itself is necessarily a bad thing but the issue is not as simple as 'this will save your daughter's life'. I wouldn't be surprised if the Gardasil vaccine becomes the subject of a big lawsuit down the line...

mamatomy- you cannot force your child to have the vaccine against thier will if they are 'Gillick competant'. A rational child has the legal right to refuse any medical treatment, even if it potentially life-saving.

Well some might say that's where it's all gone wrong isn't it, a dentist sat on me to have a tooth removed that would have been nothing more than ugly, I screamed blue murder at the time, now I'd have been charged £2k (and I'd pay it) to have the procedure performed.
The point is to let parents be parents because the buck stops with us, we are the only ones who'll be sorry if anything goes wrong.

The critical difference is age. It's a (relatively) preventable cancer which peaks amongst young women:

"In 2007 there were 25,033 new registrations of carcinoma in situ of the cervix uteri in the UK 2-,5. Most (23,791 - 95%) cases are registered in women under 45, with peak incidence in the 25-29 age group." I can't locate the numbers, but that's a huge proportion of cancers amongst women under 45.

Paralysed cancer drug girl

"It quotes 44 deaths which was news to me"

You can read the facts here. I know, I know, they're part of the conspiracy.

do you object to any refusal of medical treatment by under 16's then?

Is it ok for parents to be able to force a 15yo into an abortion for example?

a child who doesn't want a 4th round of chemo?

a gastric band?

a late circumcision?

a breast reduction?

medicinal botox?

ritalin?

a hysterectomy?

contraceptive implant/jag?

tonsilectomy?

surely it's right that the children have a right to a say in these things?

Claig - Daily Mail? Yes - a good source of non-biased truthful information

agree with you lal123, the Daily Mail is the best. I recommend it. It will tell you things that the Guardian won't mention.

more from the Daily Mail. Not sure if the Guardian reported it, very much doubt it.

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1167803/How-safe-cervical-cancer-jab-Five-teenagers-reveal-alarming-stories.html

and a debate in the House of Commons
services.parliament.uk/hansard/Commons/ByDate/20090513/mainchamberdebates/part007.html