Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

SIL has not vaccinated my nieces

999 replies

Pittcuecothecookbook · 12/08/2018 19:49

My baby has been booked in for her vaccinations soon. I asked my sister in law, who has primary school aged kids, about the experience and I was flabbergasted when she said she didn't get their jabs. I can't quite believe it!

When I asked why, she said the risks outweighed the pros but she struggled to articulate what the risks were beyond 'potential death'. I said that that was also the downside of not getting the jabs too! She said she was persuaded when her friend said that the jabs couldn't be undone if her kids had a reaction.

AIBU to be shocked and quite disappointed about this? I'm not looking forward to it by any means, but the eradication of many awful diseases and protection against those still prevalent is surely a non negotiable?

When her kids don't get these diseases, she'll be vindicated but that will likely be because the majority have had their jabs rather than proving jabs were unnecessary.

I imagine I'll get over this - my child will be protected - but I'm just Shock at hearing this news.

OP posts:
MissSusanSays · 15/08/2018 22:19

Also, isn’t the whole point of herd immunity and the vaccination program to protect those with underlying conditions, who would be more vulnerable, from getting preventable diseases. It is actually the entire fucking point that we should be protecting these people, not just going ‘Oh well, you were already sick and there was no way to save you’. Except there was.

MissSusanSays · 15/08/2018 22:21

I’d also like to point this out: the MMR was introduced in 1988

SIL has not vaccinated my nieces
MairyHole · 15/08/2018 22:22

A fact said by Cath isn't true? Say it ain't so!

Cathmidston · 15/08/2018 22:29

Source: Office for National Statistics

Prior to 2006, the last death from acute measles was in 1992. In 2006, there was 1 measles death in a 13-year-old male who had an underlying lung condition and was taking immunosuppressive drugs. Another death in 2008 was also due to acute measles in an unvaccinated child with a congenital immunodeficiency, whose condition did not require treatment with immunoglobulin. In 2013, 1 death was reported in a 25-year-old man following acute pneumonia as a complication of measles. In 2016, one death was reported in a 10-month-old infant who suffered complications due to a secondary infection.

All other measles deaths since 1992 shown above are in older individuals and were caused by the late effects of measles. These infections were acquired during the 1980s or earlier, when epidemics of measles occurred.
www.gov.uk/government/publications/measles-deaths-by-age-group-from-1980-to-2013-ons-data/measles-notifications-and-deaths-in-england-and-wales-1940-to-2013

Graphista · 15/08/2018 22:32

Sue - and as myself and MANY others have said that our opinion (and this is supported by fact on herd immunity, pps who CAN'T be vaccinated becoming infected etc) is that this NOT simply a matter of personal choice (and as also several have pointed out its parents making choices for the health of another on their behalf so not PERSONAL choice at all) it is a serious issue that affects EVERYONE.

I haven't advocated mandatory vaccination but I have stated I would advocate unvaccinated children being barred from childcare and state education. Even WITH sanctions - it's still the parents choice but that choice then comes with clear consequences.

And it's not just me - it's BILLIONS of people have assessed the benefits outweigh the risks - all over the world! Particularly including highly qualified experts in the field.

All those who have decided for non-medical reasons not to vaccinate, have done so as far as I can tell from what I've read and seen and discussed - without any real scientific basis for making that decision.

MairyHole · 15/08/2018 22:33

Sorry Cath, but that link appears to be from the government. Everyone knows the government is trying to murder us all by injecting us with aluminium which some woman once said was bad for me so I don't believe what the government says anymore.

Graphista · 15/08/2018 22:33

Cath what you've written at 2202 is so far from anything resembling correct knowledge about disease, symptoms, vaccines - I hardly have words! Such complete and utter nonsense!

MairyHole · 15/08/2018 22:35

But what do you think it proves incidentally? Vaccines are working by preventing illness and death. Sadly where children cannot be vaccinated they are susceptible to the effects of this hideous disease. The information you posted just proves that herd immunity is vital for the immune compromised. Did you mean to prove that?

Graphista · 15/08/2018 22:39

"You have lost all credibility. What you are promoting is irresponsible in the extreme."

"complete and utter tissue of lies!"

I wholeheartedly agree.

MissSusanSays · 15/08/2018 22:40

CoteDAzur

Yes, it is still a selfish motivation to vaccinate to benefit yourself or your children. But it has no knock on effect on others. And therefore, with not the most morally ideal motivation it is still one that has the by product of helping others. Not problematic.

Not vaccinating is morally problematic because it is a selfish motivation in which the person is wilfully ignoring or forgetting to calculate the impact on others. They calculate only the risk to themselves/ their children. This is the worst kind of selfishness- the kind with dangerous consequences for other people. Again, like drink driving or speeding. It is a public health issue.

lightonthewater · 15/08/2018 22:45

I don't think it's your place to blame really or judge. It is their choice. Butt out.

CoteDAzur · 15/08/2018 22:48

"Not vaccinating is morally problematic because it is a selfish motivation in which the person is wilfully ignoring or forgetting to calculate the impact on others."

Yes, and I don't think it's "morally problematic" (whatever that means) for a parent to refuse a vaccination that she believes will not benefit her child.

Parents will of course put their children's well-being above and beyond that of strangers who might or might not ever be affected by that decision.

You seem to be forgetting that vaccination is voluntary. That is because there is a risk/benefit calculation that is the responsibility of the parents.

Suewiang · 15/08/2018 22:48

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Suewiang · 15/08/2018 22:49

Totally agree cote

MairyHole · 15/08/2018 22:50

Ah Sue, you and your opinions! Facts be damned! Science be damned! So says Sue, the world famous biochemist!

CoteDAzur · 15/08/2018 22:51

"even fervent vaccine promoters acknowledge that vaccines are leading to immune dysfunction"

What on Earth is "immune dysfunction"?

Suewiang · 15/08/2018 22:55

Deffinately some kind of hole

PurpleDaisies · 15/08/2018 22:58

even fervent vaccine promoters acknowledge that vaccines are leading to immune dysfunction

Are they? Where?

CoteDAzur · 15/08/2018 23:01

"Childhood illnesses have been replaced by a host of permanent chronic conditions."

Could that be because we now know of more conditions and can actually diagnose them? It used to be that people were called nerds, a bit slow, or forgetful. Now we have the autism spectrum, dyspraxia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's etc.

"We are certainly not healthier than we were 30 years ago despite the ever increasing vaccine schedule."

We are, actually. Cancer is the #1 killer these days because most of the diseases that used to kill previous generations are prevented or easily treated.

"The US who has the highest vaccine schedule has the highest infant mortality rate of any developed country... a disgrace"

Surely you are not confusing correlation with causation? Someone with a medical background really shouldn't.

MissSusanSays · 15/08/2018 23:02

CoteDAzur

I don’t disagree with you about motivations. The issue really is the certainty that the risks outweigh the benefits. But people who espouses this, as demonstrated in this thread, cannot provide evidence of these risks.

So, what I really object to, is the selfishness of creating risk for others based on nothing more than feelings and irrational fears (irrational because they have no foundation in fact). Like my fear of flying is irrational. People have died in planes. But the benefit to me of flying to somewhere (as opposed to the statistically greater risk of driving) is greater than the that tiny risk of crashing.

Can we run society on unfounded ideas and irrational fears? Or should we run then on fact and for the good of all?

Mum2jenny · 15/08/2018 23:14

Currently, in the U.K., the choice to vaccine or not lies with the parents. End of.

You may not like the status quo, but it is what it is. Again, end of.

It is known as free choice.

Suewiang · 15/08/2018 23:17

Exactly right Jenny and as it should always stay like

Mum2jenny · 15/08/2018 23:18

Thanks Sue

MairyHole · 15/08/2018 23:25

And with the excellent research posted by those titans of science, Cath and Sue, it's clear that there's only one choice.

Graphista · 15/08/2018 23:25

My child is 17 and working full time now, no longer in school but of course I hope (not too soon) that I'll have grandchildren. I have a niece and nephews still in school though.

My idea (which has been implemented by govts in some countries) is not 'dumb' it's not even my idea!

Germany are bringing into law a system of fining parents who don't vaccinate as response to a rise in measles cases.

I don't have blind faith in vaccines.

I have educated faith that they do what is claimed and massively REDUCE the risk of both getting those infections and if my child did, how seriously she would be affected.

I have educated faith that good hygiene, nutrition, and when necessary treatment of wounds and disease ALSO protects my dd and reduces her risk of getting certain infections.

I have educated faith in the facts around herd immunity and am angry others don't take responsibility in providing it while happy to benefit from it (like op's sil).

I have at the age of 46 seen first hand the effects of certain diseases inc in the immunocompromised both as a relative and as a nurse. Unfortunately not everyone can be vaccinated but yes! Based on my experience, training and knowledge I strongly believe those who can should be.

My dd has a disability which means that if she were to contract certain diseases she would almost certainly be hospitalised, if not worse.

In fact a couple Christmases ago she contracted a condition which for most people can be treated easily with otc meds and wouldn't even need them to stay off school/work. But for the immunocompromised and those with certain other conditions can be extremely dangerous. I believe they're working on a vaccine for it.

For my dd it meant a 3 week stay in hospital, on iv meds, enteral feeding for the first ten days, then liquids only until the last couple days when she could finally manage soft foods. Soft foods continued at home while she gradually got used to more substantial food.

She's a very slim child always has been (all my family are until we have kids - in the case of the women) and lost a lot of weight she really couldn't afford to. Struggled walking to the loo, needed to use a chair in the shower while in hospital and when we got home had baths initially that I helped her in and out of.

This was a normally fairly fit and healthy 15 yr old at the time.

Her disability is largely invisible to others but she feels it daily, because the main symptom is pain.

I was extremely worried at the time (a lovely mner chatted away to me while I watched over her fretting and feeling utterly powerless).

I dread to think what would have happened to her if we didn't live in a country where vaccinations are not only easily accessible and reliable but free. I suspect I'd have lost her a long time ago.