Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to consider single vaccinations over the MMR when mumps is not available?

133 replies

MsKalo · 22/10/2010 23:19

I had my ds vacinated with single jabs - at the time he had the jabs, all three, measles, mumps and rubella were available. Now it is the time to vaccinate my dd and mumps vaccine is not available and I am unsure how to proceed as I really do not like the thought of the MMR and that big hit of all 3 in one...

Anyone had bad experiences with MMR? Any doctors in the house willing to give an unbiased (ie: not all pro MMR!)opinion?

We may go ahead with the measles and rubella and the chicken pox as there is not mumps vac available or should I just think about the MMR

DECISIONS! AGHHH!

OP posts:
IsItNapTimeYet · 22/10/2010 23:26

My daughter has just had the MMR and I think it is safer to have it than not have the mumps vaccine.

I have seen some mums in the very difficult position that they started the single jabs so have had the measles and rubella, but after waiting for a long time for the mumps to become available they are having to have the MMR anyway so effectively having double doses.

YANBU to consider it as being a good parent is about looking into all the options, but in my opinion MMR is the best and safest option,

(I'm not a doctor just a fellow mum)

ShowOfBloodyStumps · 22/10/2010 23:27

Richard Halvorsen's book is very good. 'The Truth About Vaccines'. He's a GP.

OnEdge · 22/10/2010 23:30

Why don't you want them all together?

Olifin · 22/10/2010 23:33

I'm in a similar predicament Ms Kalo. Our son has had single measles and rubella jab but mumps is obviously not available. We made an appointment about 2 months ago for him to have MMR then cancelled at the last minute. Arrrgggghhh indeed! Sorry, no advice but will be looking at the responses with interest.

twinsandall · 23/10/2010 02:59

Please just give your tot the triple vaccine-at time of scare can understand worry and giving three separate jabs, but now all evidence is MMR is safe (and Dr Wakefield struck off partly for his part in it). My 6 and 4 year old had with no problems.

jabberwocky · 23/10/2010 04:39

We are in a similar situation. Ds2 had all three singles but obviously now cannot have the mumps booster. I am going to wait, assume he has enough immunity from the first and hope that mumps becomes available later on OR he can get the MMR when he is much older. With a dd I would probably just go with singles now of measles and rubella. Just my humble opinion.

fanjolina · 23/10/2010 06:37

The potential side effects of mumps are not as serious for girls, so if it were me I would proceed with the singles

Original poster
MsKalo · 23/10/2010 06:52

Yep Fanjolina, because she is a girl I am not as worried as I would have been if he was a boy and it helps thar mumps is not life threatening etc.

In response to why do I want singles, they are more effective long term and I just don't believe that 3 in 1 is a great way to vaccinate - I think it is s lot for a little baby.

I am still not sure but will look at the book recommended so thanks and it is great to hear from mums. Has anyone had bad experiences of MMR?

OP posts:
Original poster
MsKalo · 23/10/2010 06:55

Ps I think Dr Wakefield was unfairly struck off and I have heard of too many cases where MMR has had an effect to be cautious...

OP posts:
nickytwotimes · 23/10/2010 07:00

Ds 1 was fine. Ds 2 will be getting it.

I've actually yet to meet anyone who has had a bad experience with it, but I totally understand your reservations. I was apprehensive too.

Wrt 3-in-1 being a lot, remember that the jags they get at 2, 3 and 4 mths include a 5-in-1 as well as the other 2 seperate ones.

Having said all that, if singles had been offered as an alternative, I might have opted for them. I have no logical explaination for this! Sorry!

purplewednesday · 23/10/2010 07:49

FFS.

Dr Wakefield was unethical and money grabbing and has caused so much harm by causing the anxiety that is evident on this thread. It was a good decision to have him struck off because he has completely undermined the fundemental point of medical research - that it shouldn't harm patients.

Its all about risks versus benefits. No risks have been identified by large properly conducted studies of the MMR.

Mumps is truly horrible and if you really want to see your DCs suffer when it can be easily prevented then Shock, so there is a benefit in vaccinating. If they have already had vaccines for measles and rubella it won't harm them having another one, and as for all this nonsense about 3 vaccines in one go being too much for the immune system - if it was, then it wouldn't be done. How many bugs are children exposed to in one go at nursery/playgroup/school? They don't get exposed to each virus just one at a time...

ScroobiousPip · 23/10/2010 07:55

Agree with purplewednesday. Absolutely no justification for single jabs other than fear factor. Certainly not in child's best interests if mumps not available.

Catrinm · 23/10/2010 07:57

Well said Purplewednesday. I can't believe this is still a serious concern for people in 2010!

Both my boys have had the MMR with absolutely no side effects.

Bechka · 23/10/2010 08:23

I went to a talk by Richard Halvorsen, who was very good.

My DD will be having single jabs with him for measles and rubella, and we will wait for mumps single vaccine to become available again. I would be more concerned re mumps if I had a DS, obviously.

She will also have her chicken pox vaccine with him.

Tootlesmummy · 23/10/2010 08:28

I was unsure in the lead up to my son needing to have his injections and it took my DH months of research and data gathering to convince me that it is safe.

I would go with the MMR if I have another child.

grapeandlemon · 23/10/2010 08:31

DD went for a single jab Measels only, we will do Rubella before puberty and wait for mumps to become available.

I have had mumps, DH has had mumps it was unpleasant but nothing like measels which is bloody awful.

DD has nasty reactions to vaccinations so our fear was never autism; it was picking up the pieces of constant diorreah/ infections.

bamboobutton · 23/10/2010 08:35

ive only given ds the measles jab. he doesn't need the rubella and he caught it naturally so he is immune now anyway.

he will have his mumps jab in about 7 years, if he hasn't caught it before then, as it's only risky for boys if they get it as teenagers. hopefully it will be available then, if not he will have to have the mmr.

dd will have measles jab when she is old enough, won't have the mumps one at all and will have the rubella one when she is 13ish so it keeps her immune into her childbearing years.

MrsLucasNorth · 23/10/2010 08:41

MsK - is there any indication of when the single jabs will be available?
My DD had separate jabs and tbh I'd be inclined to do what you're thinking. It's going to be at least 6 months before she has that 1 if you do them separately, by which time stocks may be back in anyway.

PW & SP there are reasons why it may be safer for some children (ie those with immune systems already compromised by illness or other meds) to have separate jabs. Even if Wakefield's research was wide of the mark the fact that the 'powers that be' seem hellbent on taking away our freedom of choice as parents, even when we are willing to pay hundreds of pounds for the privilege, is totally unacceptable imho.

Hope all goes well whatever you decide MsK.

ScroobiousPip · 23/10/2010 08:44

Bamboobutton - not sure why you say your DS doesn't need a rubella vaccine? Infected children are the main way that the disease is spread to pregnant mothers where the results can be pretty devastating.

And, yes, on the whole mumps is not generally a fatal disease but it can lead to mild meningitis and other symptoms requiring hospitalisation.

MMR is almost always going to be in a child's best interests.

Debs75 · 23/10/2010 08:47

It's fine for you all to say 'my ds/dd had the mmr and she's ok so just have it'
Lucky you, my son had the mmr and he has autism.
I don't blame the mmr for giving him autism, he would probably have it anyway, I do however feel it is one thing that didn't help. He hasn't had the booster and his 2 younger sisters are not getting it either.

I am in the process of researching seperate jabs but they are pretty hard to find.
I wish the government would understand that people like me have real fears about this jab and would like an alternative.
Nothing is 100% effective, the pill is 98% effective, condoms are 98% effective,even Jeremy Kyle's lie detector is only 96% effective so why is the MMR universally safe? It stands to reason that whilst it is very safe for thousands of children there is going to be a few where it is not safe

ScroobiousPip · 23/10/2010 08:47

MrsLucasNorth - accept there are a few children for whom the MMR vaccine might not be appropriate but the cases on here seem to be children in good health.

I don't accept you 'choice' argument. The NHS and the Government generally are financially at breaking point. There are hard decisions being made every day to not fund cancer and other treatments on the grounds of cost. There is no medical reason for most children to have single vaccines - to offer them means that money is being taken away from other valid life-saving treatments, purely on the basis of prejudice and fear.

Olifin · 23/10/2010 08:50

ScroobiousPip You're right about mild meningitis possibly being caused by mumps but this is also the case for chicken pox, as far as I understand it. We don't routinely vaccinate against that.

RockBat · 23/10/2010 08:51

DD had single vaccines for measles and rubella but we were too late for the mumps vacc. She's 2.9 now and I have no idea what to do about it all.

ScroobiousPip · 23/10/2010 08:55

Olifin - good point. I don't understand why the MMRV vaccine isn't offered in the UK (which includes chicken pox). It's common elsewhere.

ScroobiousPip · 23/10/2010 08:56

RockBat - there is no reason why you can't still have the MMR, on top of the single doses given previously.

As someone else down the thread made the point, children are exposed to multiple viruses all the time (eg cold, flu, tummy bugs). Their immune systems are designed to cope.