Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To suggest immunisations should be a legal requirement?

595 replies

rednailsredheart · 29/01/2015 10:44

Look at it like this:

Wearing seatbelts it purely a safety issue. It's also a legal requirement in the UK to protect car passengers.

So why is immunisation not a legal requirement?

Likewise, drinking and driving is a criminal offence, due to the danger to the passengers and other drivers/people around you.

But deliberately choosing to let your child become a carrier of a totally preventable disease, infecting people around them (including those too young for immunisations), is totally fine? If someone doesn't vaccinate their child, then the child subsequently becomes gravely ill, why aren't the parents charged with neglect?

Makes me think of this article

ONION

OP posts:
leedy · 05/02/2015 15:36

"Why are you even asking that leedy? Do you think people shouldn't be given accurate information about diseases? "

Of course I think people should be given accurate information about disease, I'm just not sure why you're banging on about how we apparently overstate the dangers of polio in a thread about vaccination if you (apparently) don't think it's relevant to vaccination. Or do you actually think that it's sufficiently "overstated" that we shouldn't vaccinate against it? Or worry about polio outbreaks?

bumbleymummy · 05/02/2015 15:39

I wasn't 'banging on' about it. I mentioned it in one post of many. People who didn't know that may find it interesting.

Hakluyt · 05/02/2015 15:40

Ok, bumbly . That's twice now. Tetanus not that big a killer. Polio- most people didn't even know they had it.......Hmm

Only a minuscule number of people suffer vaccines damage, so no need to have the slightest concern about vaccinating our children.

Why does it work for polio, but not vaccines?

bumbleymummy · 05/02/2015 15:43

Well both of those statements are true Hakluyt - you can look up the figures yourself. I thought you were already well informed about these things.

Factor in the risk of actually contracting the diseases (and consider the fact that even with the vaccine you may contract the disease) and scale up the risk of vaccination given the under reporting and you may see why some people weigh up the risks and choose differently for their child.

leedy · 05/02/2015 15:46

"Factor in the risk of actually contracting the diseases (and consider the fact that even with the vaccine you may contract the disease) and scale up the risk of vaccination given the under reporting and you may see why some people weigh up the risks and choose differently for their child."

So in fact you are saying it's a valid reason for someone not to vaccinate?

Bloody hell, it's like arguing with jelly.

Hakluyt · 05/02/2015 15:49

"scale up the risk of vaccination given the under reporting"

What qre you scaling it up by?

PandasRock · 05/02/2015 15:53

Re tetanus. I was bitten by a dog a few years back. Classic deep puncture wound, tetanus risk.

In consultation with an attending nurse, I optedfor wound are rather than a tetanus shot. I can't imagine I wouldhave acted differently if it had been my child instead of me.

Bumbley, iirc advice now is no more than 5 tetanus jabs.

Dutch1e · 05/02/2015 15:56

They are discredited and struck off for doing flawed unethical research, spreading it in the Media and in some cases, making money out of the resultant parental worry

If only drug manufacturers were discredited and outlawed after doing exactly the same thing! I'd have much more faith in the medical system Grin

bumbleymummy · 05/02/2015 16:00

leedy, I'm suggesting why some people may come to different conclusions than others. If you genuinely believed that your child would get tetanus and DIE if you did not vaccinate them then it would be very hard for you to understand why someone wouldn't vaccinate.

bumbleymummy · 05/02/2015 16:03

Hakluyt - hard to say given that we don't know the exact scale of it. Under reporting is pretty bad for adverse drug reactions so if vaccines were the same it coudl scale it up quite a bit.

Grin Dutch

seeminglyso · 05/02/2015 16:03

Well if they start it in the states (see link) it may well come here too... I personally would welcome it. All these anti vaxxers are freeloading from the rest of us. We do not exist in a vacuum - if they lived in places with these diseases they would be queuing up for a vaccination - they believe there is a risk but they are happy for others to take it. Selfish.

www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-lawmakers-propose-to-increase-vaccinations-of-schoolchildren-story.html

Toomanyexams · 05/02/2015 16:08

This is a pointless discussion. Facts won't change these beliefs. Reasoning won't change these beliefs.

It's now well studied that beliefs precede facts. And that new facts don't change people's pre-existing beliefs. In fact, most people will sift out and simply disbelieve counterfactuals. It is a rare person who can actually change their mind when the facts change.

Here is a nice article about it:
www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney?page=1

This is why we all know intelligent, well educated people who persist with what look like "crazy" ideas to those of us outside their circle of belief. Being clever will not stop a person from falling into the pitfalls of the human psyche. I think these sorts of biases we innately have that cloud our judgement are just part of being human.

It's similar to how difficult it is for people to properly work out probabilities in their daily lives. For example, my very high IQ, highly numerate, highly educated husband is a sucker for insurance. I have to keep him well away from the rental car counter whenever we travel. It's an emotional thing. Not an intellectual thing.

bumbleymummy · 05/02/2015 16:15

Did you read the thread seemingly?

Do you know what people living in countries with those diseases would also like? Decent sanitation and healthcare provision, clean water, adequate food perhaps?

seeminglyso · 05/02/2015 16:15

Toomanyexams - You summed it up well. I read a similar article about why its impossible to change people's mind in spite of the facts and I have spent enough time on facebook threads to realise its true... luckily the majority of people are not exposed to this mislaid 'belief' and we can all sleep a bit easier knowing that.

seeminglyso · 05/02/2015 16:24

bumbleymummy - the clean water argument is nonsense - yes hygiene and sanitation prevent disease - but how do you then explain recent measles outbreaks in the states and in this country?

Also plenty of vaccine preventable diseases have existed in developed nations, you saying the states didn't have clean drinking water in the 50's when polio was still rife?

Hakluyt · 05/02/2015 16:28

Sanitation was pretty good in the SW of England when I was a little girl and polio was still a serious worry for parents........

leedy · 05/02/2015 16:30

Sanitation is also not going to stop you getting measles.

Hakluyt · 05/02/2015 16:33

I agree about drugs companies misreporting and concealing research. Th?t's why we should rely on independent scientists not either sponsored by drug companies, or with vested interests in alternative vaccination protocols.

The tetanus thing is interesting. I find it hard to accept that a parent with a child with a wound of the sort that increases the risk of tetanus would choose to run the risk- even if it a small risk.

bumbleymummy · 05/02/2015 17:15

Seemingly, you're the one trying to compare developed countries to developing ones. Not quite a fair comparison! If you contract those diseases in a developed country, you are much more likely to survive.

fascicle · 05/02/2015 17:16

hakluyt
I am shocked that people think they can prevent and treat tetanus and would rather chance having to do that than let their child have a tetanus shot..........

hakluyt
Ok, bumbly . That's twice now. Tetanus not that big a killer.

Can you explain why you disagree with bumbly's comment? What figures have you got on tetanus? Apparently In 2013, there were seven confirmed cases of tetanus in England and Wales and no deaths.

The wound care prevention advice is valid, as it is for something like cellulitus, which is much less rare than tetanus and results in tens of thousands of hospital admissions each year, and hundreds of deaths in England and Wales.

Hakluyt · 05/02/2015 17:23

fascicle - you need to read the whole post.I am not disagreeing with the statements about tetanus and polio that bumbley made. I am wondering why any attempt to say that reactions to vaccines are rare and usually transitory is jumped on from a great height, but it is OK to use the same arguments about illnesses. Even when those illnesses sometimes cause death or lifelong paralysis.

Hakluyt · 05/02/2015 17:25

"Apparently In 2013, there were seven confirmed cases of tetanus in England and Wales and no deaths"

Yep. Anti tetanus is very effective.........

PandasRock · 05/02/2015 17:29

Hakluyt, do you really find it hard to accept that I would treat my children as I treated myself when faced with a tetanus risk wound?

I find it odd that you think it so odd, tbh.

I got bitten by a dog. It was a deep puncture wound. I cleaned it up and went along to a walk in centre (was away from home) to seek medical advice. The nurse was the first to suggest no jab, btw, which i found refreshing (having had a discussion with dh about how likely it was to be suggested to have a tetanus jab 'just in case') and she was equally happy that I was accepting of this advice rather than insisting on a (as it turned out) pointless jab.

We agreed on the way forward (wound cleaning and dressing and regular checks - had to enlist dh for that as wound was in a hard-to-see place), and that I would seek further medical advice if any untoward signs presented.

What is so odd about that, and why would I do anything different for my child?

bumbleymummy · 05/02/2015 17:34

Hakluyt, I think part of the problem may be that the figures for deaths from those diseases are quite likely to be accurate whereas reported adverse events are not. So when people claim that reactions are 'vanishingly rare' or (worse) claim that parents of vaccine damaged children are wrong, that the reactions were just coincidence etc it's upsetting to people who have or who know vaccine damaged children.