Kids vaccinations - I would like the view from mothers

[OddJobMan]

Hi All.

First off I am a man before you ask but would love the view from Mothers perspective.

I reside on another forum and the discussion on kids vaccinations came up... one guy (who is not a parent) said he believes that the government should make it compulsory for parents to vaccinate their children and be fined if they don't. I personally believe vaccinations are a good thing but forcing more and more on parents and throwing legal action at them on ever little thing is going a step too far and where does this control stop..

So what say you Mums... should..

A. The government force vaccinations on children and fine parents that don't.

or

B. Leave it up-to the parents to decide.

It's one thing taking a child into the custody of the court (if that is the correct term) in direct life or death situations, e.g. refusing cancer treatment, clear neglect. It's another to start involving the court and social services in vaccinations, if for no other reason than they don't have the resources to deal with the cases they already have

But that is what is happening.

FWIW dc is HE. We also don't receive any money for them.

Eldest dc was actually vaccinated for hooping cough. She has just had hooping cough. Apparently vaccinations don't last.

You don't have to vaccinate your kids .Just don't bring them anywhere near mine.

I think this attitude is ridiculous. Vaccinations are not 100% effective anyway. Immune response varies all the time depending on a number of things. You could have been vaccinated and still produce no immune response, and some vaccines are far more effective than others according to the studies used to develop them. In fact, I believe 4 of the DC who caught measles in the Disney outbreak had been vaccinated.

Obviously better to get vaccinated than not though!

YY to PP who pointed out about the economics. What vaccinations are given by the NHS is based on a financial cost calculation. The UK is quite unusual in not vaccinating for CP for example.

Yes, we have those as well BlueBlueSkies

We won't take the child's say if parent says yes but they say no, but if a parent says no and the child has said they want it then we're told to put them on the list. Can't say I disagree, personally, especially as most of the kids are 15/16.

babycham out of interest - do you know anything about the pandermix side effects issue?

Just with you saying that you doubt the government would lie about vaccines - they did with that one, and that was very recently.

Couldn't have put it better myself!

I work in a school with several children whose immune systems are compromised for one reason or another, and I was very recently pregnant and now have a small child. My DS has had all his vaccinations and I did make sure I read all the information before hand, and we (DP and I) discussed it and made the decision to vaccinate.

I agree with the idea of not letting children into schools etc without vaccinations, apart from those with genuine medical exemption. It's not fair to compromise other children's health because of your own belief systems. I've recently brought home a sickness bug from school and my DS was very poorly - I don't want to bring anything else home.

I live in the US, in a state where vaccines are required to attend public schools, and I agree with this policy. When we lived in the UK I was puzzled by the idea that it should be completely up to the parents.

BUT I also wonder whether "forcing" people helps with uptake rates over time. There are definitely people who homeschool to avoid vaccination requirements. I would say, study different places, how they do it and what their uptake rates are. It is not necessarily the case that the more people are strongarmed the more they will comply. Follow whatever seems to be the most successful system.

I have the disorder formerly known as Aspergers. Children should not be allowed to attend school without all vaccinations short of compelling medical reason. Herd immunity and statistics form a very convincing arguement.
I believe in the First Amendment, but public health overrules faith.

TheOnlyLivingDeadBoyInNewYork:

Their parents hold that discretion in trust for them. The principle is the same.

I agree with the Australian prime minister.

There is currently measles, whooping cough and a few strains of the meningococcal virus of course you have to pay for this vaccine going around. There have been deaths to babies because of whooping cough and meningococcal... last one the baby lost a couple limbs at 4 months old. Some older teens and adults have also died because of meningococcal.
The lady who's newborn died because of whooping cough was just doing the school run... he was 4 weeks old.

I don't think forcing people will make a difference... but preventing access to nurseries, schools and benefits should send a strong message to these people.

Although the majority of people who don't vaccinate here are considered middle/upper middle class...who don't rely on those benefit payments. So I think the double pronged approach is a necessity... everyone wants their children educated.

Where I am from, not Australian if your child is not vaccinated they will not be allowed to attend school, end of. Unless you have a valid medical reason... it's not fair on the rest of society.

That silly bastard who spread the MMR bollocks still has much to answer for.
The man behind the MMR causes autism bollocks was found to have fraudulent results and conflict of interests. The entire thinh was a smear campaign.
Wakefield had a business plan that would only work if people were scared of MMR.
Yet people still spout his 'work' (often alongside criticism of big pharma. Odd bevause he was looking to sell stuff off the back of thsi, making him rich).

There is currently measles, whooping cough and a few strains of the meningococcal virus of course you have to pay for this vaccine going around

And vaccinating against whooping cough helps how. As I said upthread dd has just had a bout of whooping cough.

She is vaccinated against whooping cough. Doctor said it wears off quite quickly it is not a lifetime vaccination most vaccines aren't.

Whilst we are on the subject about children not being able to go to school without vaccinations what about the parents who to keep up the school attendance record up send their dc into school with coughs and colds. These are far more of an everyday danger . DD comes home from school with coughs and colds that she has picked up from a fellow classmate. If that classmate was not in school for dd to contract that cold then it wouldn't spread to us at home. Dp has cancer and that cough or cold could kill him.
To me and those with elderly relatives or those with relatives with compromised immune systems need to understand that a child spreading a cough or cold around the class is a far more danger than an unvaccinated child

I think this attitude is ridiculous. Vaccinations are not 100% effective anyway. Immune response varies all the time depending on a number of things. You could have been vaccinated and still produce no immune response, and some vaccines are far more effective than others according to the studies used to develop them. In fact, I believe 4 of the DC who caught measles in the Disney outbreak had been vaccinated.

Vaccination prevents the spread of contagious diseases by creating herd immunity. A vaccination may not be 100% effective on an individual if they are exposed to a disease, but vaccination works because if enough people have immunity, the disease can't spread.

B.

Nobody has told me how stopping kids going to school will help when there are millions of adults without these vaccinations. In 1976 children had 10 vaccinations before school, they now have 36!

Nobody has told me how stopping kids going to school will help when there are millions of adults without these vaccinations.

Because many diseases are more harmful to young children and pregnant mothers.

Because diseases spread quickly in schools.

To encourage people to vaccinate their children.

Ride the not getting a school place is about protecting immunocompromised / vulnerable children, obviously school means large amounts of children in close contact. Vulnerable children might cope with colds but something like measles or mumps could easily kill them. Surely we want our schools to be safe environments for all children?

So it's emphasising the social responsibility side of things.

he believes that the government should make it compulsory for parents to vaccinate their children and be fined if they don't. I personally believe vaccinations are a good thing but forcing more and more on parents and throwing legal action at them on ever little thing is going a step too far and where does this control stop..

The Australian government has done something similar to this. They've got a "no jab, no play" and "no jab, no pay" policy, which means that parents of unvaccinated children will not be able to accept benefits for their child, and it means that the child won't be accepted into childcare if they're unvaccinated.

There are exceptions for genuine cases, but religious exemption etc. no longer applies.

I support it. I think it's one of the only good things this government has done, actually.

StarUtopia

"12 year olds don't need HPV vaccine, judt educate them on safe sex"

Hope you'll also educate her on safe rape, Star. Or indeed safe 'trying to get pregnant with husband who is an asymptomatic carrier' (lots of people are). Your implication that HPV is a disease of the promiscuous and will encourage teen girls to have unsafe sex is such judgmental bollocks. And the reason they give it to 12 yr olds is precisely BECAUSE they are generally NOT at it like knives at that age - waiting until they ARE to vaccinate is the very definition of locking the stable door after the horse has bolted.

"HPV vaccine only protects against certain forms of cancer!" Well, not smoking probably won't stop me developing sarcoma, so best start a 50 a day habit because what's the bloody point of only protecting myself from SOME cancers, eh?

huuuge eyeroll your poor daughter!

The thing is though, many of those "unvaccinated" adults will have already had the illnesses in question! Which is why you don't often hear of 60 year olds with measles, they already had it as a child.

Most of the diseases we are trying to protect children against are most dangerous to children, pregnant mothers, and the elderly. So children in schools, nurseries, their mums and grandparents. Vaccinate the children, ffs.

Probably because of my own childhood, but I find it really sad how many people would be quite prepared to sacrifice the education of already vulnerable children (those with parents who don't give a fuck - not those not vaccinated for good reasons) for other children. I do think that's getting into the realms of suggesting that some children are more important than others.

If any of the parents on this thread were made aware that their child's school was unsafe I bet I know exactly what they'd do - they'd research the next best school for their child or they'd push for changes at the school. For a child with parents who dont' give a fuck they'd just end up with no education, especially as home edding isn't subject to a set standard or checks.

You'd have to change a lot imo, to make it acceptable to socially isolate children who potentially already have neglectful parents (again, those unvaccinated by parents like mine who just didn't give a shit) even more.

@Oliversmumsarmy

of course it wears off...thats why there are boosters given.

A 4 week old should not have died because the mother took her children to school...

How do you make a comparison to the common cold and whooping cough?...
you do realise YOUR circumstances are unique not everyone has immunocompromised individuals living at home...therefore getting a cold from school isn't such a big deal as say getting whooping cough or measles.

oliversmum are you really arguing that because your own child had a limited response to a vaccine, no one else should bother? -and if you aren't, what's the point of posting?