To think she should have informed me her kids are unvaccinated?

[InMemoryOfSleep]

I went to antenatal yoga with a lovely teacher, who then visited my house with her two children once my baby was born. I also attended her baby group several times with my DS, and her children were also present.

I've just found out that she's an anti-vaxxer, and I cannot stop thinking about the fact that she exposed my tiny baby to her unvaccinated kids, without my knowledge! AIBU to think she should have informed me before bringing her kids to my house, knowing my baby was too young to have been vaccinated yet?

And what about all the babies at the group - I get that it's her personal choice to not vaccinate (though I am vehemently against it) but as she is acting in a professional capacity surely she should be informing parents that her unvaccinated children will be there? I certainly would have thought twice about taking my DS before his vaccinations.

I think it's highly unlikely that her children will have been harbouring infections. Mass vaccination means that those diseases are now incredibly rare, so the chances that her children could have been infected with those diseases are extremely low.

hackmum have you not read about outbreaks of measles and other diseases recently, that would have been prevented had parents vaccinated their children? This can be lethal for newborns.

OP, YANBU. I would have told her off.

yabu vaccinated kids carry germs and the unvaxxed dont carry the germs around every day that have vaccines. Do you intend for every parent you meet to disclose their kids health record.

I'm the most pro vax parent ever but why on earth would she have to tell you her kids aren't vaccinated? Where does that end?

I would say she should tell the parents of a newborn who has yet to receive his vaccinations. Ditto if she knew someone was immuno-suppressed.

Agree that chances of them having anything are small enough - thanks to all the other people who do vaccinate.

I'm not allowed to even take my dog to be groomed without proving he's up to date with his vaccinations in case he passes something on to a puppy. My dog.

@LilQueenie maybe RTFT, I feel you're somewhat missing the point. But for the sake of argument; no, I don't expect every parent I meet to disclose their child's health record

I accept that my DS will come into contact with lots of unvaccinated children, however he is now vaccinated which means he has significantly less chance of contracting a deadly disease than he did when he was a few days old.

Springishere: "hackmum have you not read about outbreaks of measles and other diseases recently, that would have been prevented had parents vaccinated their children?"

Yes, I have read about outbreaks of measles, but they have been very localised. There were 531 cases in England and Wales last year - obviously not ideal, but still a very small number.

Unless the OP is unfortunate enough to live in an area where there has been an outbreak, the chances of her baby contracting measles from an unvaccinated child is very small.

What other diseases have there been outbreaks of?

Mumps and rubella.

You don't know when an outbreak is going to start and if it's in your area. Small chance, yes, but with massive consequences for unvaccinated children. Also, totally avoidable and unnecessary.

It's like not wearing a seat belt. Small risk that you'll crash, but if it happens, you're in trouble. Not vaccinating your children is worse than that, because firstly, your putting your child's life at risk without them being able to have a say and secondly, you're putting other people's lives at risk.

Also, OP, if you suffered from diseases like measles etc as a child and you are now breastfeeding, your antibodies will transfer to your baby and have a protective effect. Of course you may be too young to have had those diseases yourself.

Luckily, Spring, I didn't say it was like wearing a seatbelt. I simply said that the risk was very small. Which it is.

YANBU as your child is a new born and more vulnerable to anything her children may be harbouring. Of course not the same if your child was vaccinated and older.

yanbu. choosing not to vaccinate is neglect imo, unless it's on proven medical grounds like an allergy.

Was the doctors waiting room empty when you were waiting for his vaccinations? As I would have thought he is much more likely to catch something there than from a couple of kids who were not even ill Unless you chose to never let your child outside they will be exposed to all sorts of things from both vaccinated and unvaccinated children and adults.

I also can't believe your ds is now fully vaccinated, unless this happened over a year ago, as some vaccines are not given until a year old. So make sure he stays away from anyone under the age of 1.

unless you go and get checked for antibodies no vaccinated child can say they wont pass on a disease they have been vaccinated for so blaming the unvaxxed is not exactly fair.

hackmum, risk=probability x consequences. The probability of catching a disease that is being vaccinated against in the majority of children may be small, but the consequences of what happens when a child catches the disease are great, including life-long effects and death. Therefore, the risk is rather great.

The probability of catching a disease also rises if you are close to unvaccinated children.

Furthermore, the more people decide to not vaccinate their children, the higher the probability will rise and the higher the risk will be.

The seat belt example was to demonstrate that risk is not just about probability and how a society generally takes measures against high-risk scenarios, even when the probability of something happening is small, because the after effects are great.

People can be hideously insensitive where their own kids are concerned and cannot imagine their child will cause harm or are primarily concerned with what their child wants.

We have had MANY occasions where small kids have been brought to birthday parties with parents stating that the child had vomiting and/or diarrhoea that morning but just soooooooo wanted to come!

On a general social good level, perhaps if more parents reacted honestly with horror and repulsion then antivaxxers would figure out that they're being selfish fucking shits.

YANBU. Measles is very prevalent in some areas and depending what part of the country live in, TB is a growing issue.

I grew up before the time of MMR vaccine. We had polio, diptheria and tetanus jabs and that was it. I had Measles, Rubella and Mumps. Measles was the worst and I felt a bit under the weather for about 10 days before the rash came out. No one would have known I was harbouring measles. It was grim aged 9, never mind for a tiny baby. It's beyond selfish imo.

There was no Rotavirus jab when DD was small and she got it aged 14 months. That was an isolation ward job and exceedingly miserable for her. She lost a lot of weight and it took time for her to pick up properly again after it. Unless there is a bloody good reason for a child NOT to be vaccinated, I think it's unfair on the child and for those too young or not able to have their jabs who they come into contact with.

Measles, Mumps, TB, and Rubella are all back in London. Reason? Unvaccinated PFBs. Funny that minute these rabid antivaxxers' kids go deaf or have to get limbs amputated due to a preventable disease, their stance on vaccination changes.

Uhm, baby could have been made ill by a vaccinated child too. It only takes one ill child (before the symptoms appear) to cough or wipe its nose, then touch a handle of something and your teacher's kids to touch that handle to then touch your baby. They won't get ill if they are inoculated, obviously, but inoculations are not like anti-flee on cats which kills fleas as soon as they jump on. Obviously there will be less of the disease flying around if everyone is inoculated, but other than that, vaccinations do not kill diseases. They only make sure you don't get ill when you do come in contact with them.

For what it's worth, MMR is not given until the age of 10 or so in Belgium and the Netherlands. I don't see them dying/becoming deaf, blind/having limbs amputated in their droves over there.

When you have a new puppy, you keep it away from other dogs until it has had its vaccinations unless you know for sure those other dogs have had theirs. It should be the same level of vigilance for new babies imo.

Also, it's not just her children she is putting at risk by not vaccinating. Herd immunity is incredibly important for those not yet eligible for vaccines, such as newborns.

@kikibo - Belgium and the Netherlands give SEPERATE MMR vaccinations at the same age that the UK gives the combined vaccine. They don't wait until the kid is 10 and possibly disabled due to MMR to vaccinate!

UppityHumpy My hearing has never properly recovered after having measles :(

Kikibo the thing is though that MMR IS available here for young babies so why risk catching these nasty illnesses if there's an alternative.

Yanbu OP. Yoga twat might think that research on Google and sticking tumeric up her arse will protect her and her kids but she has no right to put your newborn at risk. Selfish, stupid, ignorant cunt
Love this!

She is and idiot. But all babies under 1 won't have had the mmr. Are you going to avoid your baby being with any of them until can be vaccinated?