Unvaccinated children around newborn

[Foldback]

I don't want to clog the other post here but I wondered what peoples thoughts are.

I'm currently pregnant. My closest friend chooses not to vaccinate her children aged 2 and 6 and has done this since pregnancy, both children attend nursery. Although I wouldn't make the same decision I don't want to debate her reasoning or the pros and cons of vaccination, there has been plenty of that on the other thread.

I have tried to research the possible risks but feel I'm stumbling in the dark on google. AIBU to not allow her / her children to have contact with my DS until he is able to receive his immunisations or am I being PFB?

I had this same situation, although my friend's son was 3 and didn't go to nursery. I just let them come and stay - it was when my ds was very tiny. Idk, I think the chances of there being any probs are so small. But you have to do what you feel.

Also, super interesting piece on the radio that the carrier of Men B that we're on about vaccinating at the moment are normally teenagers, who carry it in their nose and throat. These are the people giving it to babies, so the argument is, they should be included up to age 18.

My daughter died from MenB have a look at the evidence session

I gave my children the vaccines offered by the NHS, when they were offered, because I believe in collective responsibility, and that the NHS doctors and scientists know more than a Google search.

So if you had a baby who couldn't be vaccinated for medical reasons, you would be happy for that baby to be around unvaccinated children - in particular those unvaccinated through parental choice, not because of medical reasons, and associating freely with other children in the community, at school etc?

Ok well that is your call to make. It doesn't make the op U though.

As a paediatrician, I'm with bungmean - no way I would knowingly take the risk. Because I've seen the potential results.

The diseases that are vaccinated against are extremely rare statistically, and the chances of these children having one of them and passing it onto your baby are minuscule. Diseases such as flu and chickenpox can also be dangerous for newborns and the chances of catching one of these from a random stranger out and about are much higher I would have thought. When you go to baby/toddler groups, the supermarket, soft play etc. you will have no idea who has been vaccinated and who hasn't.
But - your baby, your choice, you have to do what feels right for you.

The diseases that are vaccinated against are extremely rare statistically

Yes, because of vaccinations.

I gave my children the vaccines offered by the NHS, when they were offered, because I believe in collective responsibility, and that the NHS doctors and scientists know more than a Google search.

Couldn't agree more.

Anyone who chooses not to vaccinate their children (and for those who can't be vaccinated it isn't a choice) are stupid, selfish and dangerous. And aren't they bloody lucky to live somewhere where it's likely everyone else will clean up their mess for them. Anti vaxxers are the ultimate example of first world problems.

Tobysmum77, "collective responsibility"is great, but, sadly, when a child is damaged by a vaccine, or a parent mentions that a child might be damaged by a vaccine, these concerns are swept under the rug. No one comes together to help vaccine damaged children. If "collective responsibility" was extended to vaccine damaged children then perhaps more people would be keener to vaccinate in the first place.

Side, you keep talking about catastrophic damage done by vaccines. To what damage are you referring?

I would think that any damage done by a vaccine is rare and probably no worse than the 'damage' a child with meningitis or measles would suffer. I've never actually heard of blindness due to vaccination, but I have from measles.

Not all illnesses are ok to have as a kid and so the vaccination is for others benefit. Or perhaps the tiny chance of something going wrong is acceptable to you even in the face of a child losing their limbs to meningitis. (Which I've had as an adult, and might I say is one of the worst things I've ever suffered).

Perhaps your morals would be a comfort in the face of a deathly sick child.

But then again perhaps not.

MrsUniverse you do know that the govt. run a vaccination damage fund? www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment

im glad they recognise a small amount of people who are affected by vaccinations through no fault of their own. I think the criteria for claiming should be relaxed slightly because I believe there are many more people affected than is currently admitted.

Yes I am aware that in very rare cases some people react badly to vaccination. However I wanted Side to elaborate on her points as the damage caused by many of the illnesses we vaccinate for are just as disastrous.

To be honest the arguments presented here focused on rubella particularly when measles, meningitis and other diseases are awful to the person getting it not just others who may or may not be unprotected.

I'm glad there is a fund for vaccination damage. I'm just not happy with people acting like the things we vaccinate for are anything less than deadly and debilitating.

zzzz, if society needs to come together to help children who can't be vaccinated then society has to come together to help those damaged by vaccines, since nothing in life is totally safe. So, if I'm vaccinating my child to help someone else, then my child has to be compensated if he/she is damaged by the vaccine. Yes, there is a compensation scheme but we need a better one, easier to claim, more money.

If society expects that everyone who can be vaccinated is vaccinated to help those that can't be, then society must provide for those that lose out in the process of doing this.

Mrs, perhaps the chances of my child being damaged by one of these illnesses bothers me less than the chances of being damaged by a vaccine!

Some vaccines (particularly rubella, flu) are given to protect someone other than the child having the vaccine. I am uncomfortable with this. As I said previously, this is my biggest issue, it's a moral issue and it goes both ways, I'm uncomfortable sticking a needle into my child for the greater good of someone else. I accept, that for many ,sticking a needle into their child for the greater good of someone else is the right thing, the moral thing to do. Two different points of view