to change my mind and tell the school I don't want dd to have cervical cancer jab?

[lowfatiscrap12]

Yes, I know there's another (very long) thread about vaccines.
I was going to post my question there, but thought it would be lost under twenty odd pages of replies.
Last week I gave dd1 (aged 12) a consent form to have all 3 of her vaccinations for cervical cancer.
Now I should point out that I am very pro-vaccination. All three of my dc's have had, after plenty of research and reading by me, all of their childhood vaccinations. I've read and researched and looked at all the pros and cons and am generally pro vax.
But I've been umming and ahhing over this one.
I've checked and it's Gardasil she'd be having.
I've looked at the reasons for and against it.
I decided last week that the benefits outweighed the negatives, but now I'm wavering slightly.
I'm 39. I didn't have cervical cancer vaccinations at school.
I had safe sex and smear tests.
I've read about some of the side effects of Gardasil and I'm now quite tempted to phone the school and ask them to destroy my consent letter. Or send another letter in. Or just keep dd at home the day they do the HPV jabs.
AIBU?
What does everyone on Mumsnet think about the new HPV vaccine?

Gnome, you may have to see a private GP (our NHS GP was told by our local health care trust that he could not prescribe it, this was about a year ago). It cost about £300 per child for the 3 doses (about £90 per dose of vaccine, 3 doses each plus the DR's fee). Cost is spread out over a few months so that eases the expense a little.

As I said up thread, there has been a partial change of policy, giving boys the vaccine is being looked into now, so you MAY be able to get the vaccine on the NHS if you push for it.

DOTTY,

A booster will be introduced at some point, but don't forget, if at the end of 8 years, or 10 years, the immunity conferred by the vaccine wears off, even without having a booster, you are still in a better position than if you never had the vaccine - you've been protected for 10 years (and the younger you are when you are exposed to HPV, the stronger the association with developing cancer at a later date). And typically, the younger years of a persons adulthood are the most sexually active, and therefore the most risky in terms of catching these viruses.

Scotch she had hers 3 nearly 4 years ago

Actually, around 30% of cervical cancers are not protected against by the vaccine according to the CDC. Nearly 100% is still not 100% so there is not 'zero chance' as a PP said. In any case, these things do tend to be over estimated so chances are, that will decrease in the future.

Thanks Scotch I will check with my local surgery

Personally I was high risk of getting cervical cancer but luckily I've escaped so far

Better be protected by 70% than none at all.

pumpkin agreed

OP, bear in mind that should your DD ever choose to have children, that will require unprotected sex.

My DM, DSis and me have ALL had cervical abnormalities requiring treatment.
My DD will have the vaccine when she is old enough, hopefully DS will be able to have it on the NHS by then too.

I don't know- possibly protect temporarily against some strains of HPV which may (very small chance) develop into cervical cancer with the risk of a vaccine that you won't know until you've had it. It all just seems a bit woolly to me.

I'll stick to smears seeing as they are proven to prevent cervical cancer and a cotton swab scraping a few cells off my cervix carries fewer risks than a vaccine.

Safe sex doesn't stop transmission of HPV. I would encourage her to have it but then I am not anti-vac.

Vaccines along with smears are the best prevention, i think a 12yo shoul be allowed to make the choice herself i need be.
After all it is her body, the hpv vaccine is a prevention of certain hpvs even starting whereas smears only pick up on cell changes/cancer that has already taken place.

Bumble, I get where you are coming from, saying cervical screening is important, and needs to remains so - no argument there, there will be un-vaccinated women, women who don't get the booster (in the future), and women who get cancer after contracting other HPV strains not currently in the vaccine (together these cause pretty much 100% of cervical cancer).

However, I don't think you are seeing the enormity of 70%+ of these cancers just not happening in the first place! 70% a is massive, astounding piece of prevention. Imo, the next most dangerous strains will be added to the vaccine at some point.
It's not all about cervical cancer prevention - these 4 strains together cause very large% of other cancers in the both the male and female genital/anal area, and oral/throat area....... in fact the oral cancers are due to over take the cervical cancers in number within the next 5 to 10 years.

I say once more, PREVENTING is surely an enormous improvement over simply DETECTING most of these cancers after they have already developed!

I am very happy that my SONS are protected against the most virulent strains of these viruses - and they can't therefore pass these particular viruses on to the people they love (or have sex with ).

I am bowing out of the thread now, I've done my bit for the pro-vaccinate camp, and it's time for bed!

Totally agree with

Only time will tell. Smear tests and treating pre-cancerous cells have reduced cervical cancer by up to 90%. We'll see how effective the vaccine is (although what it actually does and what the manufacturers say that it does could be very different)

Goodnight! :)

pumpkins as I said before the forms DD2 brought home stated that they didn't need our permission. The rights of the child to choose whether they receive it matters they have that right by law.

www.wsfa.com/story/18979290/hpv-vaccine-reducing-infections-even-among-unvaccinated-study

Just one more post before bedtime !

I've thought hard about what to write on this thread. It's quite difficult.

I had cervical cancer in my thirties, even though I had regular smears. It required major surgery, including a hysterectomy and the removal of part of my vagina. As a result, I will never be able to have my own daughter to have this conversation with.

People often talk about the worries caused by long term effects of vaccination. I'd just like to share some of the long term effects of being a cancer survivor (and I'm one of the lucky ones, in that I am still here - cervical cancer is still killing far too many women, both here and all around the world). The surgery removed many lymph nodes so now I have to be very careful about lymphoedema (swelling and fluid retention in the lower part of my body). This means no waxing, no cuts, no bites, no kicks or scratches, no sunburn, never going barefoot. I've got a hernia after the operation, and a big old scar. The nerves of my bladder were affected, so although I'm not incontinent, I do need the loo a lot more often and this has had a limiting effect, for instance on where we stay overnight. Like many cancer survivors, and infertile women, I had problems with depression after the illness. My immune system is permanently affected. Psychologically and emotionally, it was like being run over by a train. It had a long lasting effect on our sex life, especially since part of my vagina is now gone. I couldn't even imagine attempting sex with anyone else if anything ever happened to DH. Financially, I went from being a successful local authority chief officer to a non working person on benefits after working my socks off in a male dominated field and studying successfully.

Finally, I'll mention the misery it caused to those who love me - my family, my DH particularly and my friends.

OP, so when you and your DD are having this conversation, please do not forget what cervical cancer is like, even for women like me who are genuinely fortunate in surviving. My life has changed enormously and permanently since cancer.

If vaccination could prevent this happening to other women, then I'd be delighted.

If the post above from scuttlebutter does not wake you up to how unreasonable your anti vaccination view is then sadly i doubt nothing will. Surely it is your daughters right to decide if she wants to have the added protection or not. Not yours.

My DD's had the jabs aged 17. She and I didn't hesitate for a moment over it but we did discuss the need to never ignore an invitation to have a smear test (or breast check for that matter) and to practise safe sex.

This generation of young women are fortunate to have this opportunity and it's also a golden opportunity to have a mother/daughter chat about women's health.

I was shocked as a teacher to become aware( only the ones that came on my radar) of how many girls are sexually active by Year 9 and some in year 7 and 8 and it was a good school.Often with older boys who they were only to keen to please in the way demanded by such lads.....the impression I got from pastoral care of 13-14 year girls in se london.
However you raise your daughter the chances are at some point she will have unsafe sex and no doubt sooner than you would like such is the peer prerssure from friends and the media- protect her with this vaccine at least against this risk.

Scuttlebutter-sorry for the pain you have suffered, if any post should change anti-vac views it will be yours.
No-one wants cancer and if this vacc wipes out 70% of cervical cancer, it is doing nothing but good imo.

I had safe sex and smear tests.

Nut you cannot know that will be the same for your daughter. Rape is a possibilty for any female, there is the possibility of an STD afterwards, or after a split condom for that matter, or from oral sex.

Give her the jab.

Scuttlebutter, thank you for sharing your story. Do you mind if I ask when you started having smears and how often they were and how old you were and what stage the cancer was at when it was identified?

Sorry for all the questions! I hope you don't mind answering them.

bumble - please just say the truth - you are anti-vaccine. I disagree with the anti-vaccine stance but at least I know where you are coming from.

Your anti-HPV vaccine stance is motivated by no other goal than your general anti-vaccine POV.

No one has pointed to any downsides (frankly, not being 100% effective is not a downside - cancer treatment isn't 100% effective either - no one is saying stop treating cancer). Some have merely speculated this may reduce smear rates (the same argument was used with car seat belts - because people felt more secure, surely they were going to drive less carefully thereby increasing accidents). This is pure supposition whereas the trials on the vaccine show they prevent cancer!

When I was at school and they gave the vaccine about 5 years ago 8 didn't have it and was frowned upon completely, after lots of reading about it it wasnt something I wanted and my mum supported me too, there wasn't as much information available then and was a fair bit of bad press at the time but you need to make a choice that's right for you and your DD.