To find these headlines on the bbc website disturbing?

[malificent7]

So apparently the unvaccinated will be treated " differently."
I have both jabs, I agree with vaccination and think some reasons against vaccination are unscientific but I think it is very disturbing that our bodily autonomy and right to choose is being eroded.
Ok...I get that pregnant and elderly people should not be protected but if they are double jabbed what is the problem with coming into contact with the unvaccinated?
One of my closest mates had an extreme reaction to the vaccine...I had no issues at all but I dont feel comfortable with this.
I am no conspiracy theorist either.

You can still catch and spread covid being double vaxxed so it actually doesn’t make much sense if you switch your brain on.

Very interesting to hear of the experience in Jersey @ILikeMyName

I think this is exactly where we need to end up. The issue is how many adults are refusing the vaccine here.

On a personal level (I've just turned down my second vaccine due to the severity of my reaction to the first), I'm upset as it feels like I'm being lumped together with the anti-vaxxers. I can see it causing trouble at work for me.

@landofgiants

Umm... sorry, but how exactly are you any different from all the other people who are lumped in together as anti-vaxxers?

I know a lot of people who can't / aren't having the Covid vaccine right now. There's also loads of posters on here who can't / aren't having the Covid vaccine right now.

I'm yet to see anyone IRL, and anyone except the odd troll on here, and anyone except the odd loon online, using wild theories like microchips and magnets to justify their (perfectly acceptable) choice to not be vaccinated. The people who think like that (that it's Bill Gate's ploy at culling the population) are probably < 0.001% of those choosing not to have it.

The rest of the "anti-vaxxers" you're so upset about being lumped in with have reasons which are just as valid as your own perfectly valid one.

I’d like to know this.
Why is ok for someone to become vaccine damaged? Is that for the greater good?
Is it a risk l should take?
Why has my choice to take this experimental injection become blurred?
I am fully vaccinated ( ones that aren’t even required here) as are my children- but this one does not sit right with me at the moment

I’d like to have an open discussion with my doctor/ or anyone that can actually tell me the facts without a you’ll be fine undercurrent.

Yeah no shit, your ‘own health choices’ aren’t actually your own when it comes to contagious diseases. You are far more likely to be a superspreader if you’re unvaccinated. That’s why barely any country will soon want to admit unvaccinated travellers without quarantine.

Yes I find it very disturbing, I thought we'd moved on from not allowing people to things based on being different. Personally I could see this coming last year, when they first started talking about jabs, but everyone laughed and said it rubbish.

WarmFluffyTowels, you're being a little disingenuous; unvaccinated people are being denied choice, as the availability of choice is conditional. The person creating the conditionality, which is effectively an ultimatum, is denying choice to an unvaccinated person. An unvaccinated person can of course agree to the conditions and comply, but the set-up is constructed and facilitated by our government, in this case.
I absolutely support our vaccination programme 100%, personally and professionally, but also take OP's wider point about bodily autonomy.
As a primary school teacher, I occasionally come across new parents who feel strongly that children who have not been vaccinated against measles should be refused enrolment. I disagree because I value the individual's right to choose.
In my inner city primary school, apparently I have, for the last 25 years, been at high risk of contracting TB and Hepatitis from working with young children and interacting with their parents, and have been vaccinated against these because I choose to and it is standard practise for teachers working in some cities. But I don't insist that parents and children who seek to enrol at my school show proof of screening and vaccination for these diseases because it's none of my business. My vaccines protect me. And that's the extent to which I feel comfortable with my level of influence extending.

@warmfluffytowels
All your examples don’t lead to health problems should they not do that particular job/ get that kind of insurance.
It’s not the same gamble.

Even if l don’t get a bad reaction - l won’t get paid if l have to be off work for even a mild reaction that l can’t work with.

@10milewalk

Yes I find it very disturbing, I thought we'd moved on from not allowing people to things based on being different. Personally I could see this coming last year, when they first started talking about jabs, but everyone laughed and said it rubbish.

It's not about being different. Its about you not choosing to do what is necessary to get back to normal. We all knew it was coming last year, it was always obvious, and expected. It couldn't have gone any other way,and thats fine.

@malificent7

It may make sense but the phrasing IS disturbing. " Will be treated differently." Words are powerful and manipulative. So now people who are not double jabbed have being " treated differently " to look forward to. A bit like the way some minority groups are treated by the home office.

I think you're being a bit melodramatic, OP! That's quite an offensive comparison.

@Honey12346

This is from the govt website. Now can someone please give me a coherent response as to why I should not be given my pre march 2020 rights back for making a personal choice not to risk these side effects (which include death)?

In order for things to start opening up again, OTHER PEOPLE had to take those risks that you think you‘re above. You don’t want the vaccine, fine. But you’re already benefiting from those who have had it, and you will continue to benefit, so let the double vaccinated have their slightly different rules on isolation for contacts and get over it.

Think of it, say, in the context of sexual consent

Please don't, that would be offensive. Also those comparing it to being a minority, that's really offensive. Stop it.

I’d like to know this.
Why is ok for someone to become vaccine damaged? Is that for the greater good?
Is it a risk l should take?
Why has my choice to take this experimental injection become blurred?

What would you suggest as an alternative? That we all get covid with the far greater risks that entails? Or that we all start in lockdown and hope it goes away? What is the alternative?

@YouWereGr8InLittleMenstruators

WarmFluffyTowels, you're being a little disingenuous; unvaccinated people are being denied choice, as the availability of choice is conditional. The person creating the conditionality, which is effectively an ultimatum, is denying choice to an unvaccinated person. An unvaccinated person can of course agree to the conditions and comply, but the set-up is constructed and facilitated by our government, in this case. I absolutely support our vaccination programme 100%, personally and professionally, but also take OP's wider point about bodily autonomy. As a primary school teacher, I occasionally come across new parents who feel strongly that children who have not been vaccinated against measles should be refused enrolment. I disagree because I value the individual's right to choose. In my inner city primary school, apparently I have, for the last 25 years, been at high risk of contracting TB and Hepatitis from working with young children and interacting with their parents, and have been vaccinated against these because I choose to and it is standard practise for teachers working in some cities. But I don't insist that parents and children who seek to enrol at my school show proof of screening and vaccination for these diseases because it's none of my business. My vaccines protect me. And that's the extent to which I feel comfortable with my level of influence extending.

What about children with a weakened immune system who can’t have the MMR vaccine? I suppose they’re the ones who should just stay at home and suck it up...

I mean, that’s a whole other level of fuckwittery and one of the reasons why the UK has lots its measles free status.

But it is completely and utterly acceptable to force ,low paid mainly female , carers to have the vaccine,

To be honest if someone is a carer then I'd be less likely to have sympathy for them choosing not to be vaccinated anyway. Many carers work with the elderly and more vulnerable, where their vaccines might not be as effective for them.

So an unvaccinated carer poses more of a risk to them, so absolutely they need to isolate and not risk transmitting covid to their patients.

@SunnySideDownBriefly

This is very confusing.

I thought that being vaccinated doesn't stop you catching, carrying and transmitting the virus. The data available is based on it reducing the likelihood that you will become hospitalised if you catch COVID.

So why the different rules? The vaccinated (me included) can still spread the disease. We're still a risk to the unvaccinated and vulnerable.

It doesn't stop it entirely. No vaccine ever does. However it greatly reduces the risks.

. I don't want to have to explain to my colleagues why I can't have the vaccine

Very few people genuinely can't have the vaccine.
The majority of these people have significant health needs/concerns which employers would be aware of anyway. It's only the boss or manager who would need to know - and with the type of health issue those people have then they'd most likely already know anyway. Just like they needed to know when some people were told to shield or have to work from home due to being cev/cv.

Colleagues don't need to know why - you just say 'I am unable to be vaccinated' or 'I need to self isolate' and leave it at that. No need to answer any further than this.

@GiantWingedWaspMoth
I think it sat ok with me when the vulnerable & elderly were getting theirs.
For obvious reasons.
Then people who had reasonable concerns were seen as a freaks & should just shut up get it done.
There wasn’t time to think - to see it play out.
That’s my concern.

The AZ was fine for all , then it wasn’t.
Then at least 2 countries l know of either banned it / or didn’t ever want it.

When my Husband went fir his second jab - he asked about the differences in the two main ones here ( UK) were.
Just to be told “ they are basically the same thing!” by a nurse.
So, little things like that start to worry me.

It doesn’t help that my immediate family is made up with people from all over the world & they have all done things differently.

[quote withlotsoflove]@warmfluffytowels
All your examples don’t lead to health problems should they not do that particular job/ get that kind of insurance.
It’s not the same gamble.

Even if l don’t get a bad reaction - l won’t get paid if l have to be off work for even a mild reaction that l can’t work with.[/quote]
Even if l don’t get a bad reaction - l won’t get paid if l have to be off work for even a mild reaction that l can’t work with.

But the reason we're out of lockdown and opening up again is because millions of people have chosen to take that risk. If nobody took the risk, hospitalisations and deaths would keep on climbing.

If you don't want to take the risk, that's of course you're choice, but your choice comes with consequences. You may not like that, but it's always been the case in life.

The point of my previous post is you are choosing to limit your life because you don't want to risk the vaccine. But it's still a choice. Millions of people have their lives limited through no choice of their own every single day. I suspect most people with say, epilepsy or Parkinsons would take a vaccine if it meant they got their freedom to drive back. But as it stands, they have no choice.

You have a choice. Make it - that's fine, but don't complain because you don't like the (known) consequences of that choice.

@Honey12346

Yes it is absolutely chilling because we are being coerced into what we do with our own body in order to regain the same rights we had prior to March 2020.

Imagine if the govt made a law tomorrow saying that women who have choosen to have abortions can not have the same rights as ones who didn't.

Abortion is still legal however there will be consequences if you make that choice.

The entirety of mumsnet would agree that is chilling.

But somehow this is different.

Of course it's different!

There is a worldwide pandemic which we have to deal with, like it or not. Nobody chose for it to be here, but it is. It's no good one or two of us taking measures against it, everyone needs to act responsibly if we're going to beat it and get back to normal life. It's really not complicated and certainly not "chilling".

Your spurious dreamed up scenaria bear no comparison. Stop winding other people up and start taking some personal responsibility. If you don't want the vaccine then no one's going to force you, just accept that for a while you may not have as much freedom as those who've had it because you do not have the right to endanger other people. Your so called "rights" do not trump everybody else's.

@MaxNormal

Only unvaccinated people will need to self isolate. This is to help protect those who cannot be vaccinated

This is going to be exactly the same people in some cases though.

Well yes. Some people genuinely can't be vaccinated. They may need to self isolate too as they may still be able to transmit to others in the same position.

Again, this won't be forever. In time the need to isolate in the case of being a close contact will stop for everyone. We aren't there yet though.

To compare covid with flu, measles or hepatitis isn't exactly fair.

At the moment we are dealing with a pandemic. Numbers are rising quickly. Unvaccinated people are at higher risk of catching it, spreading it, hospitalisation and death.

I would hope that in time, once we are past this acute stage, then we will get back to normality and nobody will be worrying about whether or not people are double vaccinated.

But for now, you have the choice of being vaccinated or not, and if you choose not to, then you might not get back to normality as quickly as those that do.

It's about dealing with a pandemic and getting back to something more like normality in a manageable way. Is it being done the right way? Maybe, who knows. But at the moment it's all we've got.

Lucidas, I agree, children who are immunocompromised are in an awful position. They have a statutory right to education. It's uncomfortable to hold two, to me, very strongly felt convictions in mind at the same time. I feel similarly conflicted about carers and healthcare workers, working with vulnerable people, who prefer not to be vaccinated. My DBil died for this reason, infected during the first lockdown by his carers. But I still have no answers.

I had whooping cough a couple of years ago and got a letter from PHE telling me I had to stay at home for two weeks and stay away from babies and pregnant women. Can’t believe my rights were restricted in this way!!!1

When my Husband went fir his second jab - he asked about the differences in the two main ones here ( UK) were.
Just to be told “ they are basically the same thing!” by a nurse

Assuming you mean astrazeneca and Pfizer, the nurse was wrong. AZ is an adenovirus vaccine, Pfizer and moderna are mRNA vaccines. They are different.