AIBU to say ‘no vaccine, no seeing grandchildren’ to my anti vaccine in laws?

[Hfjshdhs]

Name changed because I’m sure that IABU and I’m a bit scared of the fallout!

My PIL are anti vaccine, conspiracy theorists (don’t think Covid exists). They are refusing to get the vaccine.

I have a 3 year old and 5 month old. The 3 year old goes to nursery, but other than that we are incredibly careful and follow all rules. My 5 month old hasn’t met anyone because we are staying safe. None of us are CEV, but equally we have friends who are healthy, have had covid, and had a really awful time of it. So we really don’t want Covid in the house.

AIBU to say to my in laws that if they don’t have the vaccine, I won’t see them, and they won’t be seeing the grandchildren? Or is that a really shitty thing to do?

For context, I have never got on with them. They are extremely controlling. My husband has a very poor relationship with them. But our daughter loves her grandparents so we make sure they have a good relationship. My PIL are both still working, in offices, so exposed every day. If I see my PIL I don’t think I could see my own parents in the following two weeks because they are vulnerable (though have been vaccinated).

Basically I believe that the people making the recommendations on who should have the vaccine have access to way more data and the tools to analyse it than I could hope to have, so why would I second-guess a recommendation to have it, unless I was either paranoid or hoping to beat the system by letting everyone else take the vaccine?

Of course if I were recommended not to have it, then I wouldn't, for the same reasons.

I know it seems like blind trust, but my other option is getting multiple doctorates in order to be able to work it out for myself.

I think the fact you don't like them is probably 90% of your argument. If you want to minimize the risk of COVID entering your home then you need to withdraw your dc from nursery. It is really a poor logic to be banning contact with non vaccinated family members when your dc are in prolonged daily contact with a whole host of non vaxxed people, who furthermore are largely asymptomatic.

"Got to hospital. Walked in. Two doctors advanced on me from waiting room. How is she? I'm afraid it's too late. I went into her room. Sheet was over her. Doctor said to nurse go out. Leave him alone. I kissed her. She was warm. I went out. 'She is warm.' I said to doctors in hall, 'why is she so warm?' 'Of course,' he said. I left."

Roald Dahl on the death of his 7 year old daughter after she died of measles. People told him it would be good for her, and that children could handle it. He said that not vaccinating your child is a crime of selfishness.

@CrayonInThreeBits

Basically I believe that the people making the recommendations on who should have the vaccine have access to way more data and the tools to analyse it than I could hope to have, so why would I second-guess a recommendation to have it, unless I was either paranoid or hoping to beat the system by letting everyone else take the vaccine?

Of course if I were recommended not to have it, then I wouldn't, for the same reasons.

I know it seems like blind trust, but my other option is getting multiple doctorates in order to be able to work it out for myself.

I agree and think it's not blind trust it's accepting that others are vastly more knowledgable about this subjects and taking their accounts as credible.

ememem84

We have the opposite here. Fil and his partner are refusing to see anyone unless they are vaccinated.

so this means they won't see us or the dc. in my view, no great loss - but its dh's dad, and i think he is upset about this. we are way down the list for the vaccine anyway so won't be getting ours until at least September at the very earliest. “

Where are you?
UK is on track to have everyone 16 and over who wants/needs one to be vaccinated at least with first dose by the beginning of July. I’m 56, no underlying conditions and have been called for mine already.

@CrayonInThreeBits

Basically I believe that the people making the recommendations on who should have the vaccine have access to way more data and the tools to analyse it than I could hope to have, so why would I second-guess a recommendation to have it, unless I was either paranoid or hoping to beat the system by letting everyone else take the vaccine?

Of course if I were recommended not to have it, then I wouldn't, for the same reasons.

I know it seems like blind trust, but my other option is getting multiple doctorates in order to be able to work it out for myself.

Fair enough if that's your view :) I know first hand what can happen when a bunch of doctorates get it wrong - the last instance was actually re a covid vaccine (not in the UK though).

And other posters saying kids are already at nursery so they may as well see the PIL. This logic is so flawed. For one, nursery is a necessary evil for parents who work (as is, say hospitals or doctors they may need to see). And even if there is a risk at nursery it does not change the fact that seeing further people in a different setting is an entirely distinct and additional risk

Honestly though, it’s the PILs taking the risk here, not her child who is going to nursery with unvaccinated adults and children. The additional risk by her PILs is so inconsequential.

@CrayonInThreeBits

Risk profile is basically assessing your own individual health and circumstances and then making decisions based on that. So if you are obese or have an underlying health condition, or you are living in a multigenerational household with elderly family, COVID shot is a really good thing for you. But other people will have different situations.

But if you look at the risks vs benefits of having the vaccine, there's very few people for whom the benefits don't outweigh the risks. Even if you're in an extremely low-risk group when it comes to Covid, having the vaccine comes out as even less risky. The downside is you might feel unwell for a couple of days. The upside is cutting whatever risk you would've had from Covid, plus avoiding the potential anguish of passing Covid to someone who gets it really badly, plus warm fuzzy feelings of not being a selfish prat.

Some people have had covid already. The majority have had it mildly or with no symptoms. Studies have shown that antibodies from natural infection persist for 6-8+ months. For those people, the risk-benefit of the vaccine will be different.

In any case, people could potentially get very ill from flu every year but choose not to get the vaccine.

Of course they can get it wrong — but chances are they can do better than I can with a web browser, an English degree and my spare time

@babbaloushka

"Got to hospital. Walked in. Two doctors advanced on me from waiting room. How is she? I'm afraid it's too late. I went into her room. Sheet was over her. Doctor said to nurse go out. Leave him alone. I kissed her. She was warm. I went out. 'She is warm.' I said to doctors in hall, 'why is she so warm?' 'Of course,' he said. I left."

Roald Dahl on the death of his 7 year old daughter after she died of measles. People told him it would be good for her, and that children could handle it. He said that not vaccinating your child is a crime of selfishness.

Covid isn’t measles. Let’s compare it to smallpox next shall we?

bumbley yes the risk:benefit is different, but the analysis of that which was done seems to have resulted in the recommendation that people who have had Covid still get the vaccine.

@babbaloushka

"Got to hospital. Walked in. Two doctors advanced on me from waiting room. How is she? I'm afraid it's too late. I went into her room. Sheet was over her. Doctor said to nurse go out. Leave him alone. I kissed her. She was warm. I went out. 'She is warm.' I said to doctors in hall, 'why is she so warm?' 'Of course,' he said. I left."

Roald Dahl on the death of his 7 year old daughter after she died of measles. People told him it would be good for her, and that children could handle it. He said that not vaccinating your child is a crime of selfishness.

Ok but measles is deadly for children and actually kills a lot of them.

COVID is risky for entirely different groups of people. In this case, the PILs.

bumbleymummy

Some people have had covid already. The majority have had it mildly or with no symptoms. Studies have shown that antibodies from natural infection persist for 6-8+ months. For those people, the risk-benefit of the vaccine will be different. “

Yes, it is. People who have had Covid and the vaccine have even stronger protection, according to an informed bod on Today Programme a week or so ago. Win win.

Whenever you're dealing with DPs/PILSLEY who are dismissive of your boundaries, remember the three do's.

Do you love your grandchild(ren)?
Do you want a relationship with them?
Do what you're fucking told.

They are well within their rights to refuse vaccination, but they are not free from consequences of their decision.

I expect you won’t be seeing anyone else who hasn’t had the vaccine then? As in friends? People that you do actually like? I think you know you’re being unreasonable.

@DenisetheMenace

bumbleymummy

Some people have had covid already. The majority have had it mildly or with no symptoms. Studies have shown that antibodies from natural infection persist for 6-8+ months. For those people, the risk-benefit of the vaccine will be different. “

Yes, it is. People who have had Covid and the vaccine have even stronger protection, according to an informed bod on Today Programme a week or so ago. Win win.

“Even stronger” isn’t really that important if you’re in one of the low risk groups and have already had covid with no negative outcome. It’s probably more about logistics and it being easier to offer the vaccine to everyone by age group rather than trying to figure out who has antibodies from natural infection or not.

In any case, people could potentially get very ill from flu every year but choose not to get the vaccine

For goodness sake, why is this nonsense still being thrown around? They're NOT the same.

bumbleymummy

Indeed.
I’m inclined to think that once all over 40s have been called, the age bands should be dispensed with all together and anyone of any age who wants a vaccine should be able to book online.
Our son is only 18, has asthma, not bad enough to qualify for early vaccine but still a worry. Expect there are lots of 30 year olds at lower risk than he is.

@DenisetheMenace

bumbleymummy

Indeed.
I’m inclined to think that once all over 40s have been called, the age bands should be dispensed with all together and anyone of any age who wants a vaccine should be able to book online.
Our son is only 18, has asthma, not bad enough to qualify for early vaccine but still a worry. Expect there are lots of 30 year olds at lower risk than he is.

Actually, good news is that COVID poses no increased risk for asthma sufferers. Big study on this got released last month.

UsedUpUsername

Yes, thanks for that. If I had asthma myself, that would really have eased my mind.

But I’m talking about my “baby” 😱🤣

@DenisetheMenace

UsedUpUsername

Yes, thanks for that. If I had asthma myself, that would really have eased my mind.

But I’m talking about my “baby” 😱🤣

I can understand that!

@Motherchicken

YABU the vaccine doesn’t stop you from getting it, or transmitting it, just means you won’t be as ill and end up in hospital. So really whether they have it or not will not affect you.

Exactly. The PIL are more at risk than OP and her family. OP has nothing to worry about. I would never force/coerce someone to do anything to their body, which involves taking or not taking a vaccine.

My worry with regard to children and grandparents is the risk of grandparents catching off the GCs and then dying. I would not put my kids through the guilt of potentially killing their grandparents. THat would be reason enough for me to say we wouldn't be seeing the GPs until they were vaccinated.

@Cuppachino

In any case, people could potentially get very ill from flu every year but choose not to get the vaccine

For goodness sake, why is this nonsense still being thrown around? They're NOT the same.

@Cuppachino I’m not saying they’re the same. I’m saying that people choose to take risks with other viruses even though there are vaccines available for them.

This will probably end up being like the flu vaccine anyway where only the more vulnerable groups are offered it annually and it is ‘tweaked’ depending on the more dominant strains at the time.

@DenisetheMenace

Yes, I think uptake is going to be lower as it goes down through the age groups so younger people who aren’t necessarily at high risk but are worried could be offered it sooner.

Bumbleymummy

No, it's not measles and the at risk groups are different, but the anti-vax mindset clear and relevant to this thread also puts children at risk. The more distrust people have in the scientific experts, the more likely they are to suffer the effects. Dahl did some wonderful work dispelling the anti-vax conspiracies (in his daughter's memory), and while it beggars belief that it is still needed, decades later, people ought to be educated.