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 not want ds to be tested?

27 replies

bubblecoral · 19/04/2011 13:09

Ds got a rash a couple of weeks ago, we took him to the doctor, who said it was probably an allergic reaction. He was completely fine otherwise, apart from being a little itchy. It was still there and just as bad two days later, so we took him back. We were told to continue using the cream and giving piriton but also that they were going to send us out a kit to test for rubella. the rash went after a couple more days, and ds is as normal as ever.

Ds did not have the MMR, but he was vaccinated with the single vaccines. After all three singles had been given, he was tested for immunity to check that they had all taken and that he was immune. It turned out that he was not immune to rubella, so he was given the single rubella vaccine again. We didn't test him again as we decided that he has as much protection as he would have had with MMR, and that I wouldn't be happy giving him the jab three times anyway. He had all the same protection he would have done if he had been given the MMR, and he had it earlier as he was given his second rubella injection beofre the age that pre school jabs are usually given.

I don't want this to be yet another MMR debate, I made my choice way before Wakefield was discredited (not that I based my choice entirely on him anyway) and at the height of the Leo Blair thing. I may choose differently now, but with the info I had at the time, I still think I made the right choice.

What's annoying me now is, what happens if it turns out ds did have rubella? I don't want to do the test on him at all, but I know I have to as its notifiable and it's very simple so when it arrives I will do it. But if he has it, I don't want his result to go into the statistics of unvaccinated children and add to the anti single vaccine arguement. At the time it was done I told the HV he had been given single vaccines, she said that she just had to record him as unvaccinated. Will that still be on his record?

I know I am being U, my ex (his Dad) thinks so, but I feel like I had such a hard choice to make all those years ago, I did my best, and my child had all the same protection he would have done with MMR, and he had it earlier. I'm grateful that ds is ok, but I don't want him being put down on some government figures as being an unvaccinated child that ended up with rubella. Especially as I have to test him when it will have no benefit to him. Does it really have any benefit to anyone else?

Does anyone have any more knowlege on this than I do that can tell me what goes on, or just generally help me feel not so pissed off that we have to do this?

OP posts:
squeakytoy · 19/04/2011 13:22

it sounds ridiculous that he is classed as unvaccinated, when he has been vaccinated for a start off.. however, I would put more important on my childs individual health than worry about him being a government statistic..

mrsravelstein · 19/04/2011 13:26

i don't see how you can be 'forced' to do the test? if you don't want to do it, why not just not do it?

diddl · 19/04/2011 13:28

Why would you not want to know if he has it?

You don´t have to vaccinate again.

And surely you don´t want to treat him for an allergy if he doesn´t have one?

Why is he classed as unvaccinated? was it not recorded in his red book?

GiddyPickle · 19/04/2011 13:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bunbaker · 19/04/2011 13:30

What exactly is wrong in knowing whether your son has had rubella or not? In itself rubella is a mild illness (both my sister and I had it as children - we were born way before the MMR) The danger is that if he gets another rash, and you aren't sure whether it is rubella or not you will have to keep him in quarantine because the disease can have devastating results in pregnant women.

FattyAcid · 19/04/2011 13:30

Make your choice based on what is best for your son and feel no guilt

colditz · 19/04/2011 13:31

There's a rashy virus going around England at the minute, a few of my friends and their children have had it - viral rashes are really common.

I'm still pretty sure Ds1 had Scarletina as a preschooler, but as he wasn't very ill, the doctor wasn't bothered.

mrsravelstein · 19/04/2011 13:32

for info, my kids' red books, and therefore their medical records, show them as unvaccinated too, despite the fact that they have in fact had some done privately, so i assume this is standard NHS practice

mrsravelstein · 19/04/2011 13:33

bunbaker - who keeps their kids quarantined in case they've got rubella?? there are tons of viral rashes going round, i don't see people boarding up their front doors.

Bunbaker · 19/04/2011 13:38

"bunbaker - who keeps their kids quarantined in case they've got rubella"

This is why you should.

Rhinestone · 19/04/2011 13:39

If you don't want him to have the test then you have the right to refuse it.

themildmanneredjanitor · 19/04/2011 13:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
bubblecoral · 19/04/2011 14:00

Thanks everyone for all the replies.

I am of course most concerned with the here an now, and I'm glad that ds is fine. I will give him the test, I wasn't aware I had a choice though! I'n not bothered about knowing if it was or it wasn't because now it's gone I can't see what difference it makes. The doctor just said that as it's a notifiable disease he has to be tested, and I didn't think to question it. Someone phoned from the Heath Authority this morning, and said that he was recorded as unvaccinated, as per his red book, but she did seem to listen when I said that he had the singles. And I have kept the records the private doc gave me stuffed in the back off the red book so they are in there, but not officially.

I guess what I wanted to know really was what difference it makes whether I know what it is or not. Is there any advice they will give me incase he gets a rash again? They just said the surgery will let me know if he has it or not, but it doesn't sound like they will do anything either way.

I did read on here that others had had viral rashes, and I think that could be what it is, or it was what I originally thought and it was an allergic reaction.

Also I think I just get annoyed by the whole government thing about vaccination statistics because I think everyone has the right to choose what is best for their child, and the fact that my children are recorded as being unvaccinated will help to scare other people into having the jab if they don't really want it by making then think that there is less herd immunity than there really is. My problem, I know! Smile

OP posts:
mrsravelstein · 19/04/2011 14:01

i wasn't asking about the dangers of rubella, i was pointing out that when kids get a rash, people don't usually quarantine them, because it happens fairly often and it's impractical to do so.

Original poster
bubblecoral · 19/04/2011 14:04

I just read bunbakers link, which says it's transmitted by coughs and sneezes. Ds didn't have any symptoms like that at all.

OP posts:
AberdeenAngusina · 19/04/2011 14:04

DC1 did have the first MMR, then had rubella aged 2 whilst I was pregnant with DC2; very scary!

My GP described it as "attenuated rubella" i.e. it was less severe than it would have been if he hadn't had the first MMR already, although still as risky to me as a pregnant woman. I was blood-tested, but ok.

I was shocked when he was diagnosed as having rubella, having had the first MMR, but my GP said that, because of the Wakefield fuss, the Gov was over-stating the protection the first MMR gives, to encourage uptake, and that having rubella after the first, but before the booster was due, wasn't unusual.

Original poster
bubblecoral · 19/04/2011 14:09

That's interesting Aberdeen. Great place to come from btw! Grin

I was under the impression that the second MMR wasn't really a booster, it was just given because it didn't always work the first time round. Ie, it was given needlessly to lots of children that were already immune to protect the few (like my ds) that didn't build immunity the first time.

OP posts:
blackeyedsusan · 19/04/2011 14:19

it is very annoying that you went to a lot of trouble to get ds vaccinated and you are still labelled as unvaccinated. (would feel the same if i find out that dd is recorded as being late to be vaccinated when i had to make extra appointments with the dr to see if it was safe due to her egg allergy)

Seona1973 · 19/04/2011 14:25

the first mmr leaves 5-10% unprotected so the second is given to increase the amount of children covered.

FingandJeffing · 19/04/2011 14:39

He was probably recorded as unvaccinated as the singles were not licensed for use in the UK (still aren't I don't think).

Still seems weird not to put it down in any form.

bubbleymummy · 19/04/2011 14:40

Aberdeen, I'm not sure how rubella could really be any milder - it's a very mild disease anyway and is only a risk to pregnant women (mainly in the first 15 weeks) which is another reason why it seems a bit daft to vaccinate against it in childhood and potentially leave women vulnerable to it in adulthood when they could be pregnant! Hmm I'm glad you were ok.

Original poster
bubblecoral · 19/04/2011 14:41

I thought they were licenced on a named patient basis. So the paediatrician that administered them had to order them specifically for each child and then that way they were licenced. Could be wrong though.

OP posts:
FingandJeffing · 19/04/2011 14:47

Hmm, not sure. There was that dodgy guy injecting with water (as the singles were hard to get) who was prosecuted so perhaps that's why? It would have been a while ago though 6-7 years and I think procedures may have changed.

Northernlurker · 19/04/2011 14:49

I think you should get him tested and then you will know is he has had it. If he hasn't had it then he is potentially a risk to pregnant women and unborn children- including his own wife/girlfriend and child someday. Everybody should know their status - I will be encouraging my daughters to be tested for immunity way before they start having dcs.

FingandJeffing · 19/04/2011 14:51

Anyway I wouldn't wory too much there are always poor responders and people whose immunity wears off. If you had a Pead do them, you should have got him to fill in the red book. Still I'd go and write it in myself if they didn't.