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).

I don't really get it. If your child goes to nursery then you're in indirect contact with tens or even hundreds of people anyway who will be small children and their parents so not vaccinated either and a bigger risk than your pils
Sending a child to nursery is needed in order to work.
There is no need to mix with a pair of covid denying anti-vaxxers.

We are still meant to be limiting how much mixing we are doing. Common sense says it's wise to avoid spending time with idiots who think the whole thing is a hoax, so probably haven't been taking any precautions.

@Druidlookingidiot

*No. I vehemently disagree. Noone is obligated to be vaccinated for the benefit of others. I say this as someone who has been shielding for the best part of a year. Noone else has to protect me. I wouldn't put others at unnecessary risk, but ultimately protecting themselves is their job!*

We are all obligated, when it comes to the safety of others. The way vaccination works is by all those who can, getting the vaccination. This then protects us all and especially the vulnerable who can't be vaccinated. It's not about just protecting yourself.

This is not ‘how vaccination works’. In most cases we vaccinate against something to reduce the risk to ourselves, not others. That’s just an added bonus in some cases.

@LolaSmiles if they haven’t taken any precautions then they may already have had it and be immune anyway.

I have had all the vaccinations I deemed suitable for myself and same for my children.
Tbh I haven't decided re covid but it's very short sighted to consider vaccines as one bulk. Each and every vaccine justifies a different risk/benefit assessment. And indeed the NHS doesn't recommend every vaccine and different countries (sometimes with similar risk set up) will have different policies.

At present our vaccination programme in the UK consists of many different vaccines. These are given at different times in our lives. Our vaccination programme is devised by experts who have looked at the risks/benefits. For example babies are given a course of injections from eight weeks, which are the 6-in-1 vaccine for
diphtheria
hepatitis B
Hib (Haemophilus influenzae type b)
polio

tetanus
whooping cough (pertussis)

and the Rotavirus vaccine and the MenB vaccine. This is just the start of a range of vaccinations which are given.

At the other end of life we have the flu vaccination, the shingles vaccination and the Pneumococcal (PPV) vaccine.

The majority of us aren't medically qualified to make our own risk/benefits assessments, that's why we rely on the experts.

These same experts have been watching the pandemic and the effects it's had worldwide. It's now recognised by those who know, that having the Covid Vaccine is the way out of this pandemic.

The Covid Vaccine is not something someone has suddenly invented out of nowhere. It's based on years and years of research, trials and evaluations.

Vaccination has saved and improved more lives than any other public health intervention. Having a vaccine for Covid is a miracle, which would not have been available to us, probably as recently as 10 years ago. Millions have now been vaccinated and as a result, the ITUs are no longer full of elderly dying patients. The death rate is dropping, and so is the infection rate.

I'm struggling to understand why people don't want this vaccine. Look at the science, look at our very successful history of vaccination and look at what's happening.

In most cases we vaccinate against something to reduce the risk to ourselves, not others. That’s just an added bonus in some cases

Actually it's both, most of the time. Those of us that think of others that is.

01Druidlookingidiot - my point is that the vaccination policies can vary - there is no universal truth. The vaccination programme in France is quite different for instance.
The Covid vaccine hasn't been tried and tested for years. It's is partly based upon pre-existing research but it still very much being trialled and assessed as we go along. Now if I had serious risk factors I would still be jumping up and down for it. But I don't so I'm not.

Now if I had serious risk factors I would still be jumping up and down for it. But I don't so I'm not.

This is perfectly normal and from a public health standpoint, a good thing. Demand for the vaccines is naturally highest among those most at risk, which is why hospitalizations and deaths are falling fairly rapidly. If people at low risk were competing for and getting the jabs there would be more severe cases.

That said, I've seen patients in their early 30's with no comorbidities die from covid, so no one is completely safe.

@LolaSmiles if they haven’t taken any precautions then they may already have had it and be immune anyway
Maybe, but I wouldn't be adding unnecessary risk to my own health or my children's health by needlessly mixing with people who don't believe Covid exists.

Regardless of what any of us think about our government's strategy, or lack of, there's a new infectious disease that we don't know much about. We are still being told to minimise mixing and to take some personal responsibility by doing the right thing. Why would anyone want to needlessly put their children in front of people who don't think covid is real, and will have been acting in line with those views?

The covid vaccine from AstraZeneca uses non contentious technology, just as the flu jab and updates do. It is not an mRNA vaccine.

[quote LolaSmiles]**@LolaSmiles if they haven’t taken any precautions then they may already have had it and be immune anyway
Maybe, but I wouldn't be adding unnecessary risk to my own health or my children's health by needlessly mixing with people who don't believe Covid exists.

Regardless of what any of us think about our government's strategy, or lack of, there's a new infectious disease that we don't know much about. We are still being told to minimise mixing and to take some personal responsibility by doing the right thing. Why would anyone want to needlessly put their children in front of people who don't think covid is real, and will have been acting in line with those views?[/quote]
How does the op know that parents/grandparents/other contacts of the children in nursery with her child are taking personal responsibility? She doesn’t. She’s happy to take that risk. It’s quite obvious that she’s not actually concerned about any potential risk to her children (which is tiny anyway) and is just trying to control a relationship with her PIL because she doesn’t like them.

Sending a child to nursery is needed in order to work.There is no need to mix with a pair of covid denying anti-vaxxers

Needing to take the risk doesn’t magically lower the risk.

Also OP only speaks of nursery in terms of education and socialization, it’s not clear the DD has to go because she’s working. So the OP is obviously willing to take ‘unnecessary’ risks. She probably won’t even ask the vaccination status of her friends/coworkers once things start opening up

The additional risk posed by her grandparents (Covid-denying anti-vaxxers are still her beloved grandparents after all) is very minimal in comparison. It’s the grandparents who are most at risk in these interactions anyway

@TrickorTreacle

YANBU!

Anti-vaxxers have no place in society.

I dunno there's probably some thalidomide survivors who may warn about the too rapid roll out of prophylactic medications

I think its fair enough- the only person you need to persuade is your DH though. If he agrees then go for it.

How does the op know that parents/grandparents/other contacts of the children in nursery with her child are taking personal responsibility? She doesn’t. She’s happy to take that risk. It’s quite obvious that she’s not actually concerned about any potential risk to her children (which is tiny anyway) and is just trying to control a relationship with her PIL because she doesn’t like them
She's said she knows sending a child to nursery has its risks.That doesn't mean she has to take additional risks by mixing with family who think covid doesn't exist.

Just like there is a risk going to the supermarket, but that doesn't mean it's reasonable to have a play date with half a dozen children round your house.

There's risks from students going to school, but (as many people rightly pointed out on another thread) that doesn't mean it's sensible to say 'if schools are back then I'm going to stop following restrictions'.

Like the government or hate the government, the whole approach to get out of this is balancing risks. It makes total sense for a parent to send their child to nursery (or school) whilst not mixing with others, especially when the in laws concerned don't think covid exists.

I dunno there's probably some thalidomide survivors who may warn about the too rapid roll out of prophylactic medications

Disgusting scaremongering!

For the record, lessons were learned from thalidomide. Secondly vaccination is a completely different intervention with an excellent safety record. We’ve been vaccinating in this country since the 1940s and if you look at the safety record it’s easy to see how safe it is.

The Covid vaccinations haven’t just appeared overnight. They are based on years of research and studies. Millions have already had the vaccine and our country is beginning to recover.

These scaremongers on here should be deeply ashamed of themselves. Do you want us all to carry on living like this? Our mental health is suffering, people are dying from other things and our economy is fucked.

These vaccines are a miracle, everyone who can should get a vaccine.

@Druidlookingidiot

I dunno there's probably some thalidomide survivors who may warn about the too rapid roll out of prophylactic medications

Disgusting scaremongering!

For the record, lessons were learned from thalidomide. Secondly vaccination is a completely different intervention with an excellent safety record. We’ve been vaccinating in this country since the 1940s and if you look at the safety record it’s easy to see how safe it is.

The Covid vaccinations haven’t just appeared overnight. They are based on years of research and studies. Millions have already had the vaccine and our country is beginning to recover.

These scaremongers on here should be deeply ashamed of themselves. Do you want us all to carry on living like this? Our mental health is suffering, people are dying from other things and our economy is fucked.

These vaccines are a miracle, everyone who can should get a vaccine.

Hear hear!

@LolaSmiles

How does the op know that parents/grandparents/other contacts of the children in nursery with her child are taking personal responsibility? She doesn’t. She’s happy to take that risk. It’s quite obvious that she’s not actually concerned about any potential risk to her children (which is tiny anyway) and is just trying to control a relationship with her PIL because she doesn’t like them She's said she knows sending a child to nursery has its risks.That doesn't mean she has to take additional risks by mixing with family who think covid doesn't exist.

Just like there is a risk going to the supermarket, but that doesn't mean it's reasonable to have a play date with half a dozen children round your house.

There's risks from students going to school, but (as many people rightly pointed out on another thread) that doesn't mean it's sensible to say 'if schools are back then I'm going to stop following restrictions'.

Like the government or hate the government, the whole approach to get out of this is balancing risks. It makes total sense for a parent to send their child to nursery (or school) whilst not mixing with others, especially when the in laws concerned don't think covid exists.

There are currently rules about not meeting up with others outside your bubble - whether they’re vaccinated or not. The Op isn’t meeting with the in laws because of current restrictions. She’s saying she’s not going to meet with them for the foreseeable future if they’re not vaccinated.

There are currently rules about not meeting up with others outside your bubble - whether they’re vaccinated or not. The Op isn’t meeting with the in laws because of current restrictions. She’s saying she’s not going to meet with them for the foreseeable future if they’re not vaccinated.
I know that.It's understandable she doesn't want to meet with them. Their attitude to the whole thing is concerning.
Not everyone is going to be dashing back to mass gatherings and seeing lots of people day to day the second restrictions are lifted.
Those justifying ignoring the current restrictions have spent months 'making their own risk assessments' (aka doing what they like because they apparently know more than people who've spent their life studying infectious diseases), and thread after thread on here is full of posters saying everyone should mind their own business, who cares if there's dozens of people visiting next door, who cares if you hold a play date and so on.
So why is it so unreasonable for the OP to say 'actually, you deny covid exists, don't want a vaccine and I would rather not meet up for now'?

It seems that for a lot of people exercising personal judgent is reasonable when it comes to ignoring restrictions you don't fancy following but unreasonable and controlling when it comes to choosing not to socialise with covid denying anti-vaxxers.

@Druidlookingidiot

I dunno there's probably some thalidomide survivors who may warn about the too rapid roll out of prophylactic medications

Disgusting scaremongering!

For the record, lessons were learned from thalidomide. Secondly vaccination is a completely different intervention with an excellent safety record. We’ve been vaccinating in this country since the 1940s and if you look at the safety record it’s easy to see how safe it is.

The Covid vaccinations haven’t just appeared overnight. They are based on years of research and studies. Millions have already had the vaccine and our country is beginning to recover.

These scaremongers on here should be deeply ashamed of themselves. Do you want us all to carry on living like this? Our mental health is suffering, people are dying from other things and our economy is fucked.

These vaccines are a miracle, everyone who can should get a vaccine.

Couldn't agree more. Thank you for this post.

Well, yes, it’s unreasonable when you’re focussing on two people who haven’t been vaccinated but not giving a crap about all the other contacts in nursery that haven’t been vaccinated and with no knowledge about their families’ attitudes to covid.

Well, yes, it’s unreasonable when you’re focussing on two people who haven’t been vaccinated but not giving a crap about all the other contacts in nursery that haven’t been vaccinated and with no knowledge about their families’ attitudes to covid.

So it's unreasonable for a mother to say she accepts nothing is without risk, but her child's education and development is a level of risk they accept as they are otherwise being quite cautious?

Got it. They should either live as hermits indefinitely or have a free for all including mixing with covid denying anti-vaxxers who think the whole thing is a hoax.

As I suspected, exercising personal judgement is reserved for those who want to ignore restrictions but if any parent exercises their own personal judgement to exercise caution as we phase out restrictions then they're a big old meanie

@LolaSmiles

Well, yes, it’s unreasonable when you’re focussing on two people who haven’t been vaccinated but not giving a crap about all the other contacts in nursery that haven’t been vaccinated and with no knowledge about their families’ attitudes to covid.

So it's unreasonable for a mother to say she accepts nothing is without risk, but her child's education and development is a level of risk they accept as they are otherwise being quite cautious?

Got it. They should either live as hermits indefinitely or have a free for all including mixing with covid denying anti-vaxxers who think the whole thing is a hoax.

As I suspected, exercising personal judgement is reserved for those who want to ignore restrictions but if any parent exercises their own personal judgement to exercise caution as we phase out restrictions then they're a big old meanie

So the issue is the fact that they are anti vax covid deniers? If there was no mention of them being covid denying anti vaxxers, would you still think OP was being reasonable?

It appears to me that the issue is not the vaccine at all in OPs post here. Its the fact she does not want a relationship with the inlaws, and the vaccine is a perfect excuse to use as her reasons for ending contact.

Which is where OP is being unreasonable. If she doesn't want contact, then just say that to them instead of using the vaccine as the reason for it.

@LolaSmiles the grandchildren are more of a risk to their grandparents, not the other way around.

Exactly @TheChip

thalidomide survivors who may warn about the too rapid roll out of prophylactic medications

Thalidomide was not a prophylactic medication. It was a treatment for nausea and sickness - and thus sadly often used for morning sickness.. It is nowadays occasionally used for certain forms of cancer, but never for anyone who is or might be pregnant (many other anti-cancer drugs are also dangerous for unborn babies).

It was not properly tested for safety; but nowadays treatments and vaccines do get such testing.

For that matter, there are no doubt maternal rubella survivors who wish that the MMR had existed when they were born, and are horrified by the propaganda against it.

I think YABU. I understand your concerns but attempting to blackmail anyone with the withholding of children is tantamount to coercive control - and I don’t believe that’s acceptable in any situation.