To think that these girls should not be vaccinated against their will?

[bumbleymummy]

From this article here

BigBoobied - shouldn't they be given a the information so that they can make an informed decision? Do you think many 11 yos would be able to tell you what the symptoms/risk of complications from measles are? Do you think they made an informed decision to be vaccinated?

Both the father and mother have their own right to their opinions, neither has more say. Given the children are classed as minors, then a judge with all the facts is the fairest way to go.

People choose things for their children all the time, many choose not to let them eat animals, choise their religion, take them to the dentist etc. Whist we may not agree with peoples choices as long as its not illegal it is down to them.

But it's ok that we regularly pin down sobbing, screaming 5 year olds to give them medical procedures? Why is it different? It is for their benefit.
If this is your opinion that we shouldn't vaccinate I hope you campaign against piercing the ears of young girls and circumcising boys?
Vaccination is a huge part of the reason that many children live past childhood. Why go backwards?

HappyMummy, but they would be considered Gillick competent if they were choosing to have the vaccine against their parents wishes.

Does that seem right to you? 'We'll respect your decision but only if you decide to do what we want you to.'

Bumbly - there are some other threads on this.

It seems that is far easier to be deemed competent to accept a vaccination, rather than refuse one. What a surprise.

I understand that the flu vaccination is attracting some controversy as it contains pork gelatine and therefore is being refused by many for religious or ethical reasons. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-24113970 Not sure why therefore being vegan isn't seen as a valid reason for refusal.

I doubt it will happen (to the 15 year old at least). My eldest son is not competent, never will be and will not comply with medical treatment. Despite having our consent there any many medical procedures that have not being carried out (for example being x rayed & treated for a suspected broken ankle, having teeth checked, being given nurofen, having blood pressure taken, having throat checked - all abandoned because he was not compliant). I would be staggered if any doctor or nurse held down a 15 year old (or even an 11 year old) to forcibly vaccinate them.

It is usual for 12 year olds to be asked to consent to HPV (they are asked to sign the form) so very very unusual for a 15 year old not to be listened to about what she wants in her body. Even in life or death situations (which this is not) forced treatment is a difficult area.

Anyway it says that despite the deadline passing the vaccination has not yet been given due to 'practical' problems. My guess is that is finding someone willing to force vaccinate.

If the father was so keen & the mother so loopy he should have been able to present his side of the argument to the girls for them to understand. They will have plenty of people around them who can give the 'pro' argument. Having been given both sides they should be able to be asked their opinion. Or maybe suggested the older girl had an immunity check as she's already had the primary dose anyway. I can't see that forcing an injection on them will do much for his relationship with the girls.

My 11 year old ds2 knows that his grandmother is deaf in one ear from measles, he knows that vaccinations make it much less likely that you will get the disease. He also knows that he is not vaccinated against measles, and knows why he isn't - at the moment he is happy with the reasons he has been given for that.

If at 15 he decides he wants to be vaccinated I can't imagine any GP refusing him, whatever I thought- it would be about his views, not mine.

Thants, a 5 yo wouldn't be considered Gillick competent. That's the difference.

These girls do not want this vaccine. They are being forced to have it. Are you really comfortable with that?

Thants I don't think it is usual for non-compliant children to be held down. It might be usual to ignore a crying child, but 5 people were unable to hold down my ds1 (then aged 9 or 10) to take an x-ray of his ankle. No-one has ever managed to properly check his teeth, in 14 years. And he has no competence.

I don't think for one moment that a 15 year old who refused to roll up her sleeve would be grabbed and held down to be given something which actually does carry a risk to her health (however small), and which contains animal products when she has made the decision to be vegan.

I wonder what happens if no-one will carry out the court decision. In previous cases the children involved have been young with no opinion themselves, it's just been a battle between the parents. Slightly different when a medic has to forcibly treat someone with their own opinion.

I was also under the impression that capacity is not fixed. It should be assessed from day to day, so not sure what would happen if a doctor giving the injection decided they were competent to refuse.

I prefer the term Fraser Competent and I am guessing they have been too influenced by mums views to be deemed able to make a rational choice

BUT I think it is the wrong decision based on the girls ages, however I am not in full possession of all the facts

On a personal level, as a lone parent, I would hate the children's dad to take me to court like this over a decision we both agreed on initially

yes, I would think finding a hcp to do it would be impossible.
I took my teenage daughter for a MMR booster that she needed, that she agreed she needed. However, because she has a needle phobia, every time the nurse came near her she said 'no, no'. We spent a LONG time talking about it and she in fact consented, but at the critical point would, in effect, withdraw consent, and the nurse then couldn't do it. It was all awful. Every time we stopped she would say, yes, I know I need it it's a good idea, do it, then at the last minute she would say no again. In the end she got a grip and said (between sobs) yes, go ahead do it now and the nurse jumped in.

From this I conclude that hcps quite rightly would not treat without consent.

Good point about the immunity check Saintky. It might be an idea for the 11 yo too. She may very well have had rubella and/or mumps. Perhaps the girls would be more open to the idea of a single measles vaccine of it is the MMR they are particularly worried about.

It does seem wrong that you are more likely to be allowed to opt in to the vaccine than opt out of it.

I think you're right about them not being able to find someone to give it to them. If the nurse wasn't able to give it to your daughter without her consent Shall then I can't see how they will get around that.

Shalli - yes I know of a case locally where a child had a needle phobia and although consent forms had been signed the vaccination did not take place for the reasons you describe.

On one of the other threads on this someone describes how she refused consent as a child for similar reasons, and the vaccination was not given.

I have told a doctor to hold my son down before to check his throat (I wanted it properly looked at as I was concerned that it was serious & needed treatment) and she refused because he was non-compliant - he was about 6 or 7 then. I also offered to hold him myself in a way that she could then get a quick glimpse of said throat, but she refused to allow me to do that as well.

MRI's have been refused (actually that was a joint decision with us and the doctors) because of non-compliance from ds1. And in the case of the x-ray, following 5 people being unable to hold him it was decided not to plaster his potentially broken ankle because no-one could work out how it would be possible to put it on or remove it with ds1's non-acceptance of treatment.

Medics aren't generally into forced treatment unless absolutely necessary, and even in those who are non-competent they take assent/lack of assent seriously.

And a potentially broken ankle wasn't seen as something that was serious enough to warrant forced treatment.

I think at 15 legal precedent must give the older girl the choice. The leaflet from school pretty much says that girls, not parents have the final say on HPV vaccines.

In any case I can't see anyone actually holding down a 15 year old or even an 11 down and sticking a needle in them like you would a toddler.

DD1(15) reacts badly to flu vaccines and refuses to have them. I'm not likely to drag her to our local community centre to have this years.

Gordy, I thought the Fraser guidelines were specifically for contraception.

Kirjava why would the 15 year old be choosing contraception that is not the norm.

Yes, look NHS webpage about HPV - given in year 8:

^What if my daughter doesn’t want the HPV vaccination? Your daughter has to sign a consent form before she can be vaccinated. So she doesn’t have to have the HPV vaccine if she doesn’t want to. However, it’s worth making sure she’s thought things through. The HPV vaccine has a good safety record and will protect her against cervical cancer for many years.
Suggest she speaks to the nurse or doctor if she wants more information, on her own, or with you if she’d prefer^

What if my daughter wants the vaccination, but I’d rather she didn’t have it? The decision to have the vaccine is legally your daughter's, as long as she understands the issues in giving consent. Discuss this with your daughter, the doctor or nurse to get more information

I know in this case the 15 year old has been deemed to not understand the issues (bet she would have been deemed competent had she wanted the vaccination but anyway), but I think it would be something that could be challenged.

Don't get me started on the wording of the HPV vaccine literature! 'Protect her against cervical cancer for many years' grrrrrrrrr! It's not an informed decision if you're giving people inaccurate information!

To me, the idea of pinning down a 15 year old to administer a medication she doesn't want sounds like an horrific human rights violation. I don't want to live in a country that thinks this is ok.

I am generally pro-vaccine, but also pro-choice and pro-personal liberty. As a lawyer, I am absolutely horrified by this ruling.

saintly I also suspect she would have been deemed competent to choose if she had wanted the vaccine.

bumbleymummy - you are quite right about the wording in the HPV vaccine literature! No one knows if the HPV vaccine will work as it hasn't been tested for long enough. This generation of teenage girls are the guinea pigs but I'm not sure that was made clear when the jabs were given!

So who would be choosing her contraception then? My mother certainly had no say in what method I chose.

The judge's decision making seems clear and appropriate.

I don't have a problem with it.

I dn't know what the practicalities are of forcing the children to go through with it though.

Coconut, it's more the idea that they are giving that it protects against cancer rather than it protecting against 2 of the many strains that may cause cervical cancer. I was speaking to someone in public health and they are now worried that they will see more cases of cancer because girls think they are protected against it and won't go for their smears. :(

Sorry hermione but if a judge feels that the children do not have the appropriate information to make an informed decision then they should give them that information rather than making the decision for them.