Anti-vaxxers are neglecting their children?

[sallycinnamonn]

Having a conversation with a friend about this whole anti-vaxxers malarkey.

She made an interesting point saying when a parent chooses not to vaccinate their child, it should be seen as neglect, as they are failing to protect them and their wellbeing and are putting them at risk of disease/death. It should be considered neglect just as it would be if the parent was putting them at risk of disease/death through placing them in a inadequate, unsafe environment etc.

I don't agree with anti-vaxxers but have never thought about it this way before. What are your opinions on it being considered as neglect? I'm interested to see what others have to say about her opinion.

We are paying a lot of money for single measles jabs to protect our children.

If anyone wants to bring a charge of neglect against me for refusing two vaccines not in their interest be my guest. See you in court

And anti-vaxxing rhetoric isn’t a huge fuck you to children who’ve contracted a vaccine-preventable illness due to the loss of herd immunity?

It’s not a huge fuck you to autistic people to say “I’d rather risk my child dying than being like you”?

My son is both - caught whooping cough in the bloody NICU from some thoughtless idiot, and has autism (as does his twin). Even if vaccines do cause ASD (which they do not), I’d rather he were autistic and alive than dead, especially from something preventable.

Completely agree.

How is mumps and rubella not in your child’s best interests? Do they possess neither male nor female reproductive systems, for a start?

Even if vaccines do cause ASD (which they do not), I’d rather he were autistic and alive than dead, especially from something preventable.

This is how I feel about it.

rockin so what do you suggest? No vaccine? No vaccinations until teenage years? Most of the vaccinations are to protect against childhood diseases so that seems futile.

I have a colleague who is a professor in immunology and it's her advice I respect and follow......

I might just copy and paste

Mumps and rubella are for the most part mild childhood diseases.

In very rare cases mumps causes infertility in males. I have girls.

Rubella is only dangerous to pregnant women. Since my daughters are under 3 and won’t be getting pregnant just yet, it’s something we will review in their teens. If they haven’t got natural immunity by then we will arrange a vaccination.

Benes. I'm not antiVaxx, but anti lack of choice. Id suggest more choice, single jabs should be available to all who request them as I think most of us with kids who have health problems knew that long before the medics acknowledged the problem. The reason it isn't, is cost cutting only, regardless of how the government like to flower it up & that isn't good enough

Yeah September has an ' I'm alright jack so fuck the rest of society' mentality and a piss poor understanding of how infectious diseases and herd immunity works.

So selfish and irresponsible.

I delayed DD2's MMR by a short while in agreement with the HV and GP - we were trying to determine if she was allergic to CMP and throwing post-vaccination rashes and off-colour bits into the equation at exactly the same time was likely to make it impossible to prove anything (and GP would have clutched at any straw to avoid prescription formula so I was giving her none to clutch at)... delayed it a couple of months till we'd confirmed the allergy diagnosis and then went ahead. Was never a question of if we'd get it done or not - I have minimal to no tolerance of ideological anti-vaxxers (as distinct from those with reasons meaning they can't have them).

Not at all Bene

I simply believe it is wrong to ask young, vulnerable babies to take a risk for adult women.

But according to the other thread you're hoping your daughters will be immune to rubella by the time they reach child bearing age. For this to happen they need to have contracted to disease.....so your banking on them contracting a mild version. This potentially puts other people at risk too.

If they have no immunity and have avoided the disease this is likely to be because of herd immunity. Your daughters have been protected because other people were responsible enough to vaccinate their children.

The risk of vaccine damage is far, far lower than contracting the disease and the subsequent side effects.

@septemberdread
But it's not the women it's the unborn child that is at risk how would you feel if your dd was born mentally disabled due to someone else's selfish decision.
Because that's the risk you are taking for another woman's child

Bene if they get rubella and thus immunity and encounter a pregnant woman and she gets it then it goes without saying that is really sad.

But it still doesn’t convince me that she should ask my children to have a vaccination not in their interests on her behalf.

It really is as simple as that - I have had children, I checked my immunity first. I’m an adult. I do not have the right to demand that little babies take a risk on my behalf.

Children at compulsory school age should be required to show a vaccination certificate on school entry, or a doctor's letter to explain why they are exempt for medical reasons. No certificate, no entry.

If that means they are not in school, the usual penalty for non attendance would apply.
,

OP I see @septemberdread your fine so your DC is safe so tough for everyone else and as you don't have to face the consequences of your choices it's not what your problem or fault?

I think you're making incredibly selfish and irresponsible decisions on very flawed logic September and nothing will change my mind on that.
You think you're protecting your children but you're actually putting them at more risk.

What astounds me is the amount of people that think their Google based research is more credible than professionals who actually understand the complexities of the subject.

I agree September there is no reason that it is not moved to 12 or 13 years of age and administered at school.

Actually that's how I had my rubella and then and I don't know when, but it was changed..

Maybe when the government bothered to pull its head out of it a arse and address the myriad of issues around the fall in vaccinations in the UK then things will change.

The multiple people on this thread who like to be echo chambers but cannot see anything else outside of their own experience are also part of the problem.

I am not an anti Vaxxer but I will choose to vaccinate in the way that best suits my children. The government effectively outlawing single vaccines took away choice. Why are we not allowed a choice? and bullocks that's its about herd immunity as this was far higher when a choice was allowed.

Also anti Vaxxers are 1% and less. The vast majority is in communities who distrust the government for reasons based on ethnicity and or religion and another big group are those living chaotic lives.

As far as I can see the government has done very little to engage with either of these main groups or the growing group of parents who want to vaccinate but with single vaccines.

My local cattery won’t take cats for boarding unless they are fully immunised and up to date with boosters. Common sense, to protect all the other cats in their care.
It amazes me that we are more careful of cats in this country than children. Any unvaccinated child will be accepted into a nursery or school, and the result is the recent measles outbreaks.
I lost two uncles and an aunt to diphtheria, when they were babies, before WW1, so I never had the chance to even meet them.
If the anti vaxxers have their way, this vile disease will be returning, along with polio. By the time their DC are paralysed and on a ventilator it will be a little late to regret their foolish decisions.

I read a novel about a group of families that went away together to a villa and the teen girl of of one family gave the baby of the other family measles because her mother had chosen not to vaccinate her. The teenager was devastated and the fall out

I see so much control freak-ery here. Anyone who believes that not vaccinating is neglect has no concept of what real neglect is.

It comes as no surprise that the majority Mumsnet tend to be in favour of vaccination often, it seems, with mandatory/exclusionary demands as it's generally the strident middle classes who make the most noise. Ridiculous people!

Yeah it's ridiculous to want to project children and vulnerable people from infectious, potentially fatal, diseases.

What are we thinking? 🙄

Even if vaccines do cause ASD (which they do not), I’d rather he were autistic and alive than dead, especially from something preventable.

See I don’t think people actually think this. At this point in time, with a baby in front of you, you’d vaccinate knowing that the vaccine causes ASD (I know it doesn’t- I’m just going with your thread above)

Because I think most people would like at the chances of their children catching measles, mumps or rubella, and the (imaginary) chance of the vaccine causing autism and decide based on that.

Measles mumps or rubella are not inevitable diseases for those who are not vaccinated. They are a (currently extremely small) risk. If the risk of asd was say, 1 in 100, I doubt I’d be giving the vaccine either.

Thank god it doesn’t cause asd, anyway.

Oh and on the neglect thing- I don’t think labelling the behaviour is particularly useful. What would the result be? Neglect bad enough for the children to be placed in he care system? Neglect bad enough to take out a court order to ensure compliance with the vaccine programme? What it means is all that matters really, not the label

@WhentheRabbitsWentWild do you have children?