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).

Well then chances are, they could have had it and be immune so aren’t a risk to anyone.

Where is the line between different opinions that you dont understand but can accept, and those that you think mean the person deserves punishment, alientation, bullying and name calling?
Because we are allowing that line to drift into an level of intolerance with friends and family that could lead to atrocities in future.

How come people are so certain about who is right and wrong and who is unacceptable. Is it anything to do with one opinion in the news, one opinion from NHS, one opinion from government.

Did that one opinion come about because it was totally true and provable..... or did it come about because it was politically easier and useful to say there is only one acceptable opinion when managing a crisis?

Is it completely implausible to be concerned about a vaccine company? Vaccine companies pay out billions to people for their mistakes. The tobbaco industry told us for decades smoking was safe and the government wanted their money and supported them and told us it was too. Evidence that it wasnt was supressed.
Oil companies pretend to be benevolent with their public face and then pollute the seas because its profits first. Even the government lie when it suits them - pretending to find weapons of mass destruction in order to go to war over oil. None of this is crazy conspiracy. its a fact of life that there are mistakes, corruption and lies.

There really is no rational reason to call someone who is worried about an untested experiental vaccine selfish or stupid or that they have no place in society.

The reason to speak like that is that the country has gotten completely over emotional and ironically become self interested and lost all rationality and tolerance.

Great post @Hardcoresoftie

@DenisetheMenace

UsedUpUsername

I have relatives in the old country who still think gay people are going to hell and that abortion is murder. “

Lovely people?

Yes, they are generous and loving people, even though they do have traditional views informed by religious beliefs. They are amazing with my DCs.

What I can't get my around is how often people say personal judgement is fine when those citing 'personal judgement' do so to ignore restrictions, but when a mother exercises her judgement to be more cautious as restrictions lift she is apparently manipulative and controlling

She’s sending her child to nursery with unvaccinated adults and children. Presumably she will see other friends and not insist on seeing their vaccination papers. She’s just doing this because she doesn’t like her in-laws.

You are very entitled to say this. Until we have a vaccine that kids can have you need to keep then safe. Just like once all adults a vaccinated the kids won't be so still need to be careful for them.

Hardcoresoftie
There really is no rational reason to call someone who is worried about an untested experiental vaccine selfish or stupid or that they have no place in society.

Absolutely!

Which untested vaccine would that be? The one that was tested on 23,000+ people and caused no ill-effects, before it was licensed in order to try to prevent 500+ deaths a day?

She’s sending her child to nursery with unvaccinated adults and children. Presumably she will see other friends and not insist on seeing their vaccination papers. She’s just doing this because she doesn’t like her in-laws
Sigh. She's already said that nothing is without risk

The whole 'if you do X then you should also do Y' is illogical, but it goes a long way to explain why there was a thread with a poster arguing "if the kids are back in school then I'm not following restrictions any more". Everything else stayed closed whilst schools phased open precisely to balance the risks because everyone doing everything would cause issues.

The whole pandemic is about BALANCING RISK.

The OP has decided that the educational and social benefit of nursery for her DC in their early years is a risk they are happy with because they are being cautious in other areas of their life. That doesn't mean they have to go on play dates the second restrictions lift, go to the pub, let their child lick the play equipment in the park, or spend time socialising with relatives who deny covid exists and probably act accordingly.

It's perfectly valid for anyone to be cautious as restrictions lift.

And as an aside, thread after thread usually tells people that they are right to want to reduce contact with toxic or controlling in laws, but when this OP is concerned that they deny covid and don't want to be vaccinated as well people lose their minds trying to stick the boot into her.

@AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

Hardcoresoftie There really is no rational reason to call someone who is worried about an untested experiental vaccine selfish or stupid or that they have no place in society.

Absolutely!

Which untested vaccine would that be? The one that was tested on 23,000+ people and caused no ill-effects, before it was licensed in order to try to prevent 500+ deaths a day?

There are simply no longtitudinal studies for vaccine less than a year old. So it is untested in the long term.

There are educated guesses about what might happen which are scientifically led for sure, but the trial period is not officially over until Jan 2023 because they acknowledge that affects take time, sometimes not showing up until explosed to later virus's, passed on to children etc.
These mRNA vaccines are new adding more uncertainity and previous trials to use them all failed.
The Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System is also only just emerging now. Reporting systems only capture the tip of the iceberg and it takes time to establish the causality or just coincidence. It a decade to evidence thalidomide effects.

Sorry- there is a factual risk but meaningful risk and with that freedom of choice and freedom from persecution should hold.

apologies

**exposed to later virus's, passed on to children etc.
These MRNA vaccines are new adding more uncertainity and previous trials to use them all failed.
The Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System is also only just emerging now. Reporting systems only capture the tip of the iceberg and it takes time to establish causality or just coincidence. It took a decade to evidence thalidomide's effects.*

It amazes me how powerful the media is (including Mumsnet) to make people so brainwashed that they believe that this coronavirus is dangerous to children.

@Lunar567

It amazes me how powerful the media is (including Mumsnet) to make people so brainwashed that they believe that this coronavirus is dangerous to children.

It doesn't amaze me: remember the MMR panic? There was no evidence whatever about that unless you count a sample of twelve children all with some degree of mental disability who had (like 97% of the child population at the time) had the MMR, but the media leaped on the Wakefield bandwagon, and measles, which had very nearly been eliminated in this country, made a comeback.

And thus a single doctor, struck in this country as unethical for falsifying test result , single-handedly invented the anti-vax movement.

results

Lunar567
It amazes me how powerful the media is (including Mumsnet) to make people so brainwashed that they believe that this coronavirus is dangerous to children.

No, this isn’t the fault of the media. It’s been made clear over and over again that this virus isn’t dangerous to children. It’s a case of people not believing what they’re told.

Agree with pp seems a good excuse not to see them. Your 3yr old is in nursery and at the moment it's unlikely that the staff will have been vaccinated yet... so what's the difference?

There's a couple of differences:

1. It's additional and unnecessary risk. If they can get vaccinated, they should, as it reduces the risk of it spreading, or of falling seriously ill.

2. If they're anti-vaxx idiots that don't believe that covid exists, they're more likely to break lockdown/not wear masks, etc. This increases the risk even further, as they're more likely to catch it in the first place.

3. It's not just about the risk of them transmitting covid to the OP's family (and by extension the nursery staff, nursery kids and their families, her own parents) - it's the risk of the OP's family transmitting it to them (at best they end up spreading it around, because they don't believe it exists, at worst they become poorly or die).

@Mittens030869

**Lunar567 It amazes me how powerful the media is (including Mumsnet) to make people so brainwashed that they believe that this coronavirus is dangerous to children.**

No, this isn’t the fault of the media. It’s been made clear over and over again that this virus isn’t dangerous to children. It’s a case of people not believing what they’re told.

I think it’s a bit of both.

@AskingQuestionsAllTheTime without wanting to get into a big debate on Wakefield, it amazes me how few people have actually read the paper and know what was it said.

“ We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described.”

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/fulltext

People get far too much information from headlines and don’t bother reading more. We’re seeing a lot of that in relation to covid.

@Handsoffstrikesagain

usedupusername, they are not lovely people. Oh the irony of being religious and having such hateful views! What happens if one of your DC is gay? Do the ‘lovely’ grandparents suddenly decide they’re going to hell?

What do you do? Avoid anyone who has views you strongly disagree with? No-one is perfect and yes those views are hateful but I'm with UsedUpUsername on this - this is just a part of them, it doesn't define them and doesn't justify cutting people off from our lives. And hopefully in time views can change. Avoiding others for those reason will not bring any positive change.

Sounds like you should go NC anyway if you don't like them. The vaccine issue is a handy excuse but I'd be honest :)

@Handsoffstrikesagain

Ok oblada since it’s been a hot topic this week, would you agree if they were racist? If they said they hated black people?

Interesting point. My grandmother's partner (of 40yrs) made it no secret that he was racist/had racist views. Told me all Indians are thieves and I'd regret marrying my Indian husband. I had a heated discussion with him about it. But I didn't cut him off from our lives. He was a fantastic grandfather figure for my kids and he was a great guy otherwise. Yes his views on this were idiotic but they were also part of his history/trauma.

@Handsoffstrikesagain

For me personally I could not have such homophobic people around my DC. It tells me an awful lot about their overall (bigoted) character.

What if they’re your husband/partner’s parents? If you are with your husband/partner then clearly the views of their parents didn’t make them a horrible bigoted person. They clearly managed to raise someone with enough good qualities that you love despite their own shortcomings.

Oh and he was always very nice to my husband and warmed up to him. It probably changed his views over time though we never discussed it again.
What would avoiding him have achieved? He would have been even more entrenched in his views and we would have created pain and distress to the family.