To expect the Doctor to respect my wishes?

[loumum3]

I have not vaccinated my youngest child. I have done this after much research and made an informed decision. The Doctor's surgery has phoned me several times now and written requesting I go in for a discussion about this. I haven't got time for a visit to discuss this, nor do I want to so I said if I had to, I could talk about it on the phone....I have had the Doctor on the phone this afternoon grilling me about my choices, really trying to scare me into having the jabs done and trying to make me feel bad. She cannot see my point of view at all and has been very rude.

Is is really too much to expect a Doctor to respect the decisions I make about my own children ?

Has anyone else experienced this ?

I can not understand why you would not get your baby immunised. The health of your baby depends upon the health of others.Hopefully others will choose to be immunised. IMO, You are being irresponsible.

oh god the irresponsible 'argument' again

This is an argument that does not stand up to scrutiny because

1.Vaccinations are not 100% effective and

2.If your child suffers vaccination damage you will not be compensated.

That makes no sense. No, they aren't 100% effective, which is all the more reason you need the protection of others being vaccinated...and what the fuck has compensation got to do with anything?

To clarify my pov on doctors, I do believe that most GPs promote vaccination because they believe it's best for the child. That said, a lot of GPs are not well read on the latest research either. They simply do not have time and are a port of call.

Yes, the UK has now taken the mercury out of the baby vaccines but it took a bloody long time for them to do so, years after the WHO recommended that mercury should not be used any longer, and years after the USA took it out of theirs. The UK removed it after that peer reviewed study at the University of Columbia which made a link between thimerosal and autism. We were then told the change had arisen because of oral polio being discontinued

When parents are faced with the reality that there is a conflict of interest wrt children's health within the context of immunisation policy (single vials cost more money, hence the use of mercury preservative), it is correct and sensible that we should question the schedule and not blindly accept everything we are told by HCPs.

runnybottom

It is not reasonable to expect people to sign their child up to an invasive procedure which carries unquantified risks (unquantified because it is not possible to know which children are predisposed to vaccine damage) for which the child does not give their consent when it is not 100% effective.

In which case the government should be prepared to pay compensation for vaccine damage, which at this moment it is not.

Electra you are right that vaccinations are not 100% effective. However, I had my son vaccinated against everything and he might still get measles as some people have been swayed by the media and haven't vaccinated their kids. If they had then my son and others like him are less likely to catch the possible fatal illness. Also mumps although not so deadly can cause deafness. I apparently had a mild case and now am deaf in one ear. So these diseases are not to be sniffed at.

My mum was swayed by stories about whooping cough vaccine when I was young so I was not vaccinated against it. I got it and its not a particularly nice illness. Needless to say my mum regrets her decision.

I disagree. I think it eminently reasonable, which is why my children are vaccinated.
I also think you do not appreciate the sheer luxury of your angst over such things, when millions of mothers around the world would kill to be able to protect their children in this way.

The risks are not unquantified. There are risks in everything, and in this instance there is much proper scientific research which proves that the small risk is worth taking. Unfortunatley some people prefer to listen to woo-merchants and conspiracy nuts instead of medical and scientific facts. Their choice to do so, my choice to ridicule them for it.

Your can roll your eyes as much as you want Electra there is no getting around the issue that failing to immunise your children is irresponsible.

Well I am not a 'conspiracy nut' and I find your tone rather insulting and patronising, frankly. I'm not suggesting you are an idot so please extend the same courtesy to me. Yes, the luxury of being vaccinated - I have reason to think it wouldn't necessarily be much of a luxury for my children I am not saying that I disagree with vaccinations altogether but I do disagree with mass vaccination and the lack of clinical evidence to support the age at which they are given.

I am intelligent enough to research and make up my own mind about what is best in our situation.

The problem is that this 'small risk' you talk of is not small for some children, and for those children the result is pretty devastating for them and their family. I hope you are not suggesting that it's ok for these people to amount to acceptable collateral damage.

If the majority in a group vaccinate, those who choose not to can rely on the group to protect them from the disease the rest of them are vaccinated against.

But when a large number in a group fail to vaccinate, then the situation can become very scary.
Anyone remember the outbreak in Colorado of Whooping Cough!

It is just so irresponsible.

People who fail to vaccinate are irresponsible and put the health of others at risk.

'Your can roll your eyes as much as you want Electra there is no getting around the issue that failing to immunise your children is irresponsible.'

That's your opinion - you cannot state it as fact.

Pixie - of course there are risks in anything but vaccinating is an invasive procedure - it requires careful consideration. I don't understand your argument - that you could die any day so you might as well not think about the risks in anything else?

The whooping cough vaccine is one of the less effective vaccines and also one of the most risky.

does this go anyway to help Electra?, and yes I was stating a commonly held opinion.

So Electra - do you agree that Parents who refuse vaccination for their children may be putting entire communities at risk?

If you do not, then why not???

I believe that although vaccination has some effect on disease control, the benefits are overplayed while the risks are underplayed.

I do not believe that health officials consider all the risks or accept that they are there. I do not believe that 'collateral dammage' is acceptable for the greater good.

Health officials will look as disease control as a priority, which is to be expected but some of the risks are not even considered as a result of how these programs are implemented.

There needs to be a change in how they are implemented - more consideration should be given to the possibility that some children in some groups could be more at risk and an attempt to identify them should be evident and vaccines should be given at an age which is best for the child when they are less susceptible to neurological changes. Perhaps then I would have more faith in the system as it stands.