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?

Yes, I think that's it, LightShines. There is an ideal time window for the vaccine for your DD -- say between now and two years from now. And within that time window someone needs to make the decision. If you don't think your DD is capable of making an informed decision within that time window then you should make the yes/no decision on her behalf, just as you have done for all of her previous vaccinations when they became due. If you do think she is capable of making an informed decision then she should do that. But effectively not making a decision at all (which is what refusing on the basis that she can't make an informed decision for herself effectively is doing) is an abdication of your responsibility as a parent, and a bit crap.

"yeah, risk homeostatis is a problem (people drive carelessly with seatbelts and ABS, ride bikes badly with helmets, etc)."

You see this is where the medical profession is lacking in my opinion, people have concerns and rather than take the time to address them and educate them they simply take the piss or roll their eyes. The arrogance is breath taking.

A 12 year old is not old enough to have sex because of child protection issues.

They cannot smoke or drink because these are extremely risky activities, which only adults can partake in for health reasons. It would be better, healthwise, if no one partook in these activities but they cannot be banned because they are so ingrained in our culture and it would be an infringement of our civil liberties.

Driving and voting require a certain amount of maturity and responsibility.

12 year olds have some rights, they do not have full, adult rights

Oh oh oh!

Another, probably far more important (and - doh! - obvious) reason for the form asking you to explain your objections would be that it gives you an opportunity to communicate any allergies or to explain that your dd has a needle phobia, for example.

Say you had witheld consent because you believed incorrectly that the vaccine contained a particular ingredient, the nurses could contact you giving you the opportunity to change your decision.

"You see this is where the medical profession is lacking in my opinion, people have concerns and rather than take the time to address them and educate them they simply take the piss or roll their eyes. The arrogance is breath taking."

Aside from being as far from being in medical profession as it's possible to get without working on an oil rig, there was not a single taking of the piss in there. People do drive carelessly thanks to seat belts. People do take risks on bikes that the mistaken belief that helmets will protect them encourages them to.

I didn't take mamatomany's response as aimed at you -- rather that you had accepted the concern (risk homeostasis) as valid and engaged with it ("in this case I worry less, because if pregnancy and immediately nasty STDs don't encourage safe sex, a somewhat raised chance of a disease in 20 years' time isn't going to"), which she was contrasting with what she perceives as the typical medical attitude of taking an expressed concern and dismissing it in a patronising manner.

I may be wrong and she was getting at you, of course.

At my DDs school, several girls didnt have the vaccine. They were not even spoken to by the nurses, they were left in the lessons whilst those having injection went to the hall.

I also think it would be a very stupid brave health professional who gave a vaccine without your consent.

Having said all that I cant understand anyone who wouldnt let their DD have it, it will save lives!!!

The thing is lightshines - much as you seem to want to, you can't separate your reasons for refusing the vaccine from the consent issue.

Because without knowing the reasons, it's impossible for us to say whether your daughter could or should override your wishes, and whether the school should collude with that.

For eg, if your daughter had had previous violent reactions to vaccines or to some particular component in this vaccine, then I think most people would say that it was a child protection issue for her to not be vaccinated, and that the school would be irresponsible not to support your refusal, whatever your daughter might decide.

However if the reasons for refusing are more about your moral stance, not your daughter's, then much as you believe you have "discussed" it with her and obtained her agreement, I personally believe that your daughter has the right to protect her own life if that's what she wants. If you refuse now, she may not be able to have this vaccine before becoming sexually active and that's a life-threatening decision for her so yes, I do believe she has the right to override your preferences in order to potentially save her life.

I would also ask why, if you're so sure that you have come to an agreed decision with your daughter, you are so concerned that she may change her mind when away from you. To me that suggests that perhaps you are not certain that your daughter does agree with you - whatever you state in your OP.

As an eg, suppose another parent sent in a letter to school saying "I don't wish my daughter to wear a seatbelt on the school trip." No explanation.

However on the day, the child wanted to buckle up.

Would you say the school was wrong to allow the child to buckle up, or wrong to prevent it on the basis her parent had not permitted it?

Op, have you considered the repercussions should she be unfortunate enough to develop cervical cancer?

I couldn't live with myself knowing I had denied my dd a prevention to a killer disease.

Heaven forbid but if the child of someone who did not consent to this vaccine went on to develop this cancer would they still think their worries and concerns about consent were still vaild and reasonable?

This vaccination is something that will make a difference for a very long time and it is impossible to know what the future holds. I am interested to know how many of these "reasons" will hold up to scrutiny in 20 years time.

Yup, OP makes no sense at all. On one hand, claims to have discussed it as a family and decided not to have jab, on the other hand thinks her DD might change her mind on the day.

Which is it?

I suspect this discussion may have been a bit one sided.

Oh, x post, sorry.

If you want your daughter to decide for herself, surely the thing to do is to give your consent? She can then refuse if you want to. Giving someone consent does not compel them to do it.

I understood Tokyo's reference to homeostatis as addressing a perfectly reasonable concern (that girls might be lulled into a false sense of security and enage in unprotected sex) with a perfectly valid answer (sexually active 15yos don't avoid unprotected sex because they're scared of an illness that might kill them in 20 years - they choose to use protection because they are afraid of becoming pregnant and/or getting more immediately evident STIs).

It was a good point, well made (and certainly better than my attempt!).

I totally disagree with a child of 12 being allowed to over rule the parents on a matter of health (or anything).

You are saying that at 12 she is old enough to choose for herself - what if the OP wanted her to have it done and the child didn't - this would be a very different debate.

If at 12 you think they are capable of making decisions regarding their health, then you should also consider them old enough to have sex/drink/smoke & vote - unless you are saying her health is less important than those other things.

Agree with Morris. Hope the girl has not been bullied into accepting views/ beliefs/ judgments/opinions that are not central to her life or future.

OH FGS HalfTermHero - stop being so ridiculous.

The OP has said several times she has not given consent because she believes it is her daughters decision to make not hers. She hasn't beaten her into not getting the vaccine.

Nobody is saying that a child's health is unimportant. But the consequences of a child having this vaccination are - well what?

I was part of a school nursing team that carried out HPV immunisation in schools. I'm now a practice nurse giving HPV vaccine to sixth formers.

The consent form is a standardised one and so is worded such that older girls can self-consent even where a parent hasn't consented for them. There was a catch up programme, whereby we were offering vaccination to Year 10 and Year 11 girls and many of them could self consent under the Fraser Guidelines. The wording you quoted is to allow the girls to self-consent after assessment, even if a parent hadn't signed the form.

However we had another form to complete in conjunction with that one, to show that we had assessed the girl's competency to consent and were, as nurses, happy to accept that consent. In reality we had very few situations where a parent didn't want the girls to have the vaccine and the daughter wanted it. We wouldn't vaccinate anyone in Year 10 or below without parental consent, regardless of their wishes as we felt this was inappropriate and needed further discussion with the parent.

Asking for reasons for non-consent is a data gathering exercise so that HCPs can formulate advice leaflets, amend Q&A responses and if necessary telephone parents to answer any queries they may have. If many parents non-consented based on a misunderstanding, or something that wasn't clear on the information leaflets, then they could be accordingly altered or improved.

For example we received a few non-consents because parents were concerned that they wouldn't be present when their daughter was vaccinated. We could then phone them and advise that if the school allowed, they were welcome to come in to school when we would be there and join their daughter.

Hope that reassures you.

OP, there are real concerns with this vaccine. In the US, Merck who make Gardasil, the first HPV vaccine, had to stop their political lobbying. Some of their tactics have been very underhand - paying cervical cancer survivors to talk to womens' groups but not disclosing their interest. Their promotion has been very aggressive. google HPV vaccine and the site site that comes up is... a Merck site.

This link explains all that Merck tactics

Merck wanted the age 12 vaccination date so that it would be part of the childhood vaccination programme - that was a marketing decision to increase sales. Children get more vaccines. There is no medical reason whatsoever why this vaccine can't be delayed to say 16, unless you feel your daughter will be sexually active before then.

It does not protect against all forms of HPV or other diseases and could, by inducing a false sense of protection, increase those rates. So condoms should still be used.

There are also concerns that this is a new vaccine and we do not know the long-term effects. I would not give it to my daughter at the present time.

There is no reason why you have to make this decision now.

So now there are at least two MNers who have 'good reasons' for refusing the vaccine. I am genuinely curious as to what they are for no other reason now than I thought it was a no-brainer, and it seems that perhaps I may be missing something...

ChippingIn, I don't think she has said that once actually, she has said the child is too young to consent and that they do not consent but no-where has she said it is up to the child to decide at an appropriate age whether to have this vaccine.

Op has not told us her reasons for refusal and has only told us her reasons for concern over the consent thing.

She has said they have had several conversations about it "with leaflets" so it is quite possible that the child has been bullied - just as it is quite possible that she hasn't.

"There is no medical reason whatsoever why this vaccine can't be delayed to say 16, unless you feel your daughter will be sexually active before then. "

Chipping in- Op has started this thread and refused to provide full disclosure of her circumstances or reasons for refusal. I just wonder why op's daughter feels unable to decide/ communicate to her parents that the vaccine might be preferable.