AIBU to think non vaccination is child abuse

[alittlevoice]

There was this discussion in another thread and i thought i would make a new thread so it doesn't over taken someone elses

To me not vaccinating your child is akin to child abuse because you are putting them at undue risk of disease which is preventable due to scare mongering or from quack doctors that have long been struck off the medical register and shunned from the medical community

I hate the assumption that because there has been no reported cases it means you shouldn't vaccinate your children it's because children have been vaccinated regularly that there has not been a epidemic

leading doctors (not the quacks) have been worried for some time about the rise of mumps because of the scare mongering and children not getting vaccinated and get seriously Ill and have to be saved by modern medicine (which quack parents are always keen to take up on with there anti vaccination stance)

rubella has a incubation period as many other diseases so if your child has it and you dont know and child is near a pregnant woman and she loses her child due to non immunisation I don't understand how as a parent you'd do that to another person

So the long and short of it is why are some parents touched in the head and think they have the right for there child to possibly kill unborn children and infect younger babies too young to have the choice (and for those saying this is far fetched its as plausible of something going wrong from immunisations)

Arm-chopping! More child-abuse! Do the Psychiatrists in your Institution know that you've managed to get access to a computer?

Oh right so you're not going to protect your kids from disease because the ingredients of vaccines are a bit yuk - that's sensible.

I can't be bothered with this any more but I do need to point out that IME allergy testing has to be done by trying out the allergen on the patient so saying that if one has a history of allergies "they should be tested for those before hand [sic]" is a bit unhelpful really. This was certainly what was offered to a child in my family who is allergic to nuts. She was also offered to have MMR in hospital in case of anaphylactic shock, that was the best the NHS could offer.

Her mother declined the invitation, wisely IMHO.

Anyhow, the fact is that I, like so many others, have made my decision and won't be bullied into changing it, particularly by people who accuse me of child abuse because I don't do as they say. i don't think that you've done your cause many favours OP.

Have fun getting riled by it and continuing to offend people though, because those of us who are secure in our decisions not to vaccinate our children really don't care how annoyed you are about it.

For the people who said its not child abuse it could be neglect ... neglect is child abuse

child abuse is:

physical
emotional
sexual
and NEGLECT

and still noone has answered my question of so
you have insanely decided to not vaccinate your children do you then insure your children stay away from children too young to be vaccinated and women of child baring age (you can never tell who is pregnant early on) because as the anti vax posters have said repeatidly that it is there choice and they are there children they have made a "informed" choice these groups of people havent been able to get vaccines so its now your choice affecting them ... which is apparently something you dont agree with because you dont want my choice affecting you... but your happy with your choice affecting other people ..

alittlevoice - you seem to keep coming back to 'one quack doctor' and one particular study in your posts. Many people have posted here giving their reasons for not vaccinating and very few of them have anything to do with Andrew Wakefield or fear of a potential autism link.

Comparing the UK to developing countries in relation to vaccinations is a bit silly really. People in developing countries would, sadly, be prepared to 'chop their arm off' for many of the things that we have in this country - clean running water, food, antibiotics, general healthcare. These are things that we were also lacking at the start of the last century and yes, the diseases were rife in the UK then too but as our living standards improved so did disease outcome. Incidence reduced as did the risk of complications - long before vaccines came on the scene.

It is very easy to take for granted what we have around us in our everyday lives and actually not see what a huge difference it has made. Instead, people just give all the credit to a 'magic needle' that made it all go away - but that just isn't the case at all.

"do you then insure your children stay away from children too young to be vaccinated and women of child baring age"

alittlevoice - have you had your child's immunity checked? Have you had your own checked? Vaccines are not 100% effective and do not provide lifelong immunity. If you have not checked whether you or your children are immune then you are just as able to pass on disease to young children and pregnant women. Infact, probably more likely because you are probably less inclined to isolate your children if they are showing symptoms of any of the diseases because you will think 'it can't be that - they were vaccinated against it'

again babies : not old enough to be vaccinated so if your non vax children are incubating any disease they could pass it on to the child and cause serious complications because of your choice .... so its okay for your choice to affect other people but not for my choice to affect you? and yes babies under 12 months do not get a lot of vaccinations till that time

"if most people have been vaccinated (and if vax worked as they should) then child bearing age women will be protected"

what happens if they are under 18 and parents make the medical decisions for them and they are pregnant and your choice causes a miscarriage for them again its your choice causing a effect

alittlevoice - You can make your own medical decisions before the age of 18.

Waiting for you to respond to my question about testing your immunity by the way. TBH even if you have, everyone else who has vaccinated hasn't so there are still plenty of 'vaccinated' people that would also be able to put pregnant women and children at risk. Although there is minimal risk to young children where mumps and rubella are concerned because the risk of complications is tiny.

"so its okay for your choice to affect other people but not for my choice to affect you?"

Your choice doesn't affect us. That is why I for one don't give a monkeys what your opinion is.

"what happens if they are under 18 and parents make the medical decisions for them"

Really?

Had my DDs (then circa 13/14 years old) wanted the HPV jab they could have had it, despite my refusal to consent. Ever heard of "Gillick competence"?

bubbleymummy

i check my immunity every year because i work with children and need to be sure that i dont have a risk of making them sick because i feel thats what a responsable adult would do in my situation

i wouldnt be okay with my actions making anyone sick or causing miscarraiges its not something that would sit well with me

yes you can make your own medical deisions before 18 but if your parents are very anti vax and you will listen to them

you have been very active on this thread with your opinions and seem to tear down every one elses and unless you have conducted proven medical studies of your own your opinions are no more valid then anyone elses

people have less of the illness that are being vaccinated against because of vaccines and that is a medical fact

people who arent vaccinated against these illness are more likely to contract them and pass them onto children and the pregnant fact

wow, this thread's mental. I started the other bloody thread cos I thought I was happy to go ahead with vax. Thanks little voice, cos even though you're a wanker, the debate's re-opened for me after reading all this, so I'm back on the fence, with my poor un-jabbed abused children

Oh well, it's all your fault then, ladyfirenze. :o

oh, and it would appear that your facts are wrong. Having read some of the Cochrane reviews, it was concluded that there was no evidence the MMR made any difference....

Val - ooopsy!

alittlevoice - I have posted links to the figures that show that these diseases were declining before the vaccines were introduced - they are on the HPA website - that is not my opinion it is a FACT

people who are vaccinated but who do not have immunity to the disease can still catch the disease and spread it - FACT

The information that I have posted about incidence rates and complications from the diseases are from the NHS websites - they too are FACTS.

You have probably not bothered to even look at them or take them on board and yet you still seem to think you are somehow in a better position to judge people who actually have taken time to look into these things.

Throughout this thread you have shown yourself to be rude and incredibly misinformed about the diseases and even how vaccines work - 'medicine in vaccines' . I have not forced my opinion on anyone on this thread, nor have I resorted to abusive language or accusations about people's sanity in relation to their decision. You have ignored many of the posters who have taken time to explain why they have decided not to vaccinate and keep bringing up Wakefield even though very few people have cited him as their reason for deciding not to vaccinate.

Did you conduct your own medical research into the safety of vaccines before you choose to use them because based on your reasoning, using other people's research isn't good enough. What a ridiculous thing to say - another to add to your list!

LadyFirenze You have my sympathies! Our DC were vaccinated but that doesn't mean it was the correct thing to do, nor does it mean it was the wrong thing to do - we shall never know.

I would have thought that agonising over these decisions, to do the best for one's child, would put you in the caring parent category, and not the child-abuser category.

Now alittlevoice (not so little) is saying it's NEGLECT - betterl have S.S. round up all the DC who have not been vaccinated and put them into care homes - that should ensure a great upbringing.

I asked the OP to pm me so I could provide her my with name and address at the start of this thread in order that she could report me to SS for child abuse, GORGEOUSX, but she hasn't contacted me yet.

I really want to see how far she'd get if she did. :o

Leonie, I think they interpret it as a 'didn't bother showing up for appointments' rather than it being a consciously made decision. The doctors here make a point of discussing it with you and then just tick a box to say you've made an informed choice if you decide against a particular vaccine - I think this removes the uncertainty about neglect as far as SS are concerned.

Leonie, I would still like to see SS try it.

But... that the accusation that lack of vaccination = neglect was used in a CP investigation which was found to be entirely without foundation indicates that it's not a genuine measure of neglect, surely?

If it is an indicator of neglect, why haven't SS yet removed my children from me? They've had nearly 16 years in which to do it!

LeonieDelt That's outrageous, and more than despicable. My SIL chose not to vaccinate any of her DC and she would win 'Mother of the Year' Award, easily - all this talk of neglect and abuse is an insult to DC who ARE neglected and abused, in the true sense of the word.

I'm leaving this thread now because I think the OP is not the most pleasant poster I've ever come across