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 do think GP should leave OP alone. This thread has obviously focused on the vacination part. but what if the GP kept hounding Op over something different ?
what if.... can't think of good e.g. what if op wanted to turn the life support off on her young baby, but OP's dh didn't. what if OP wanted her young childs tonsils out, but GP didn't want her to.
OP has had discussions with a number of GP's and HV. She may very well be wrong or misinformed. but she has made her decision. No one needs to be hounded.

The tetanus vaccination pre-exposure actually protects pretty well against the infection. It is not as effective post-exposure nor do antibiotics mitigate the effects greatly. It is absurd to say that you don't think your children are at risk from tetanus bubbleymummy - it is universally present. If your child realises they have a potentially dangerous wound and you take them to A&E - sure all will probably be fine. But what if they don't tell you about it or you don't think it's significant enough - vaccinated people have some level of protection. Your children - on whose behalf you made this decision - don't have that.
Is that the answer then - your children are protected from tetanus by your belief that it will never happen to you?

"- refusing school entry for unvaccinated children (I think they do in America?)" -BalloonSlayer

Absolutely not. You do not have to vaccinate your child to give them a state education in the US. The schools will send out notices saying "If your child is not up to date on their immunizations they will not be allowed to start school" and parents freak out and go get the shots. But the reality is that our constitution allows us freedom from government-controlled and mandated medical treatment. All we have to do is fill out an immunization exemption form stating either a religious or philosophical objection to immunizing. But they won't tell you that. Many parents are ignorant of their rights and vaccinate their children because "the school says they have to". Makes my blood boil.

My dd is fully vaccinated. I just despise bully tactics.

Northernlurker, can you find a source that shows that the tetanus vaccine works well to protect? I am well aware that the tetanus spores are all around us but clearly, based on the number of cases per year, cases not even deaths, it is a very difficult disease to actually contract. Are you under the impression that every cut or scratch is a tetanus risk? It is ridiculous to think that the 60+ million people in the uk are up to date on their vaccines and that is the reason for the low case number. Also, tetanus cases have been recorded in fully vaccinated people so given that the chance of contracting it is so small, that it is treatable, that it rarely causes complications in children who have better ciculation ( obviously excluding neonatal tetanus which there hasn't been a case of in thiscountry for years because we don't use manure to seal the umbilical cord) and that the vax doesn't guarantee protection anyway we decided that the risks of the vaccine ( because every vax has a risk) did not outweigh the risk of the disease. That was our conclusion, clearly yours was different. I don't have a problem with anyone's decision to vax or not vax as long as it is informed. (IMO an informed choice involves more than a chat with the doctor or Reading an nhs leaflet)

StrictlyTory one of my children died, I think I'm in the unfortunate position of knowing what it's like to arrange your baby's funeral and if there is anything I can say to help others avoid the same horrific fate, then I'll say it. Even the vaccine manufacturers state it can occur on their vaccine inserts- SIDS for just one example peaks at the ages where children first have vaccinations- 2, 3, 4 months exactly, the neurological damage is widespread, severe reactions can occur and things like asthma, and allergies, they're all acknowledged by the vaccine makers themselves to be linked to vaccination. I'm not making this stuff up- just read the small print from the manufacturers.

Cleggover, so sorry for your loss.

Cleggover, I am extremely sorry for your loss and so while I haven't changed my mind I will bite my tongue at this point.

thank you but I didn't say it for sympathy I wasn't going to raise it but felt it necessary in response to strictlytory's outrage. I'm not making these things up, there are sadly so many more affected parents out there and I just want to urge people to look a little deeper at the facts, they're quite terrifying when you start to uncover the truth, and it makes me very very sad that parents believe they are doing what's best for their child's health but actually that can* have quite the opposite effect. I'm off now so, as you were..!

What a shame the Dr who caused the controversial should i shouldn't i vaccine my child has been struck off the medical register.

His research made parents doubt the leaflets and refused to give their child the MMR so therefore resulting in a rise in Measles.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8695267.stm

Selfish and ludicrous OP. What reasons have you got for putting the health of all of our children at risk?

Cleggover I am truly sorry for your loss.

I have a friend who works in a children intensive care unit and has witnessed the fatal outcome of not vaccinating too.

As Cleggover has left now (and so hopefully I can't offend her) I'd like to ask those who suggest it's all a government conspiracy to vaccinate who they suggest is benefitting? So far posters have suggested that the government, the pharmaceutical companies, the GPs and the WHO all benefit financially but it's not possible that they all are. I'm also intrigued by the suggestion that the WHO are corruptable by the pharmaceutical companies but not by formula producing companies. To me it doesn't make sense.

"What reasons have you got for putting the health of all of our children at risk?"

wwhhhhaaaattt?

"I'd like to ask those who suggest it's all a government conspiracy to vaccinate who they suggest is benefitting? So far posters have suggested that the government, the pharmaceutical companies, the GPs and the WHO all benefit financially but it's not possible that they all are. I'm also intrigued by the suggestion that the WHO are corruptable by the pharmaceutical companies but not by formula producing companies. To me it doesn't make sense."

Don't know about formula, however the WHO is known to be heavily influenced by pharmaceutical interests.

The pharmaceutical companies, obviously.

GPs: they do benefit financially now. But it's less of a financial interest for GPs. Ok so you studied for what is it seven years? (about two months, if that, on immunisation I think) and you are going to take seriously some mum who says she googled something?

The government. You could start by looking at the close links between people working in the health department or immunisation service -- and then move on to work in the pharmaceutical industry. From where they are then happy to make cosy deals with their old colleagues or former inferiors.

Ah, so not the government as a whole, individuals. That makes some sense but as some posters have said (either GP or spouse of one) they are not all swayed by money and can also do research post-training as much as we can (and probably with greater understanding). I'm not convinced by the WHO, do you have any data to back that up?

In what way are they known to be influenced, backtotalkabout this? Is this something widely known and demonstrated?

Totally agree with Oblomov- nobody needs to be hounded. The GP is more likely to be worried about the baby's health, though, isn't she, than personal gain?

Netdoctor states: 'The recent rise in the number of mumps cases among young students is thought to be entirely due to these children having missed being vaccinated earlier in their life.'"

Netdoctor is spouting bullshit.

The rise in mumps cases is due to the mumps vaccine wearing off!

Catch mumps naturally, as a child, and you're immune for life.

Can you provide evidence for this?

Sorry very long thread haven't read it all, but has anyone mentioned Smallpox yet? Can I ask the people with unvaccinated children if they would make an exception for Smallpox or do they think the the world (including their children, grandchildren and all subsequent generations) would have been better off if more parents had taken the decision not to give the vaccine?

Same question regarding Polio which as I understand it has in the past been very close to being completely eliminated but some parents have refused to let their children have the vaccine and so it hasn't been possible.

Again with the blame game posieparker! Why is a non vaxed child putting your child at any greater risk than the adult who was vaxed and whose immunity has worn off? When did you last get boosters for all the diseases? The mumps vaccine wears off - that is why there are more cases in adults than there used to be. Previously children caught it and were immune for life. Prior to the mmr being introduced mumps was known as a benign childhood illness not worth vaxing against! This is written in a medical journal! Have to check sources later - no time now.

Children are more likely to catch and spread diseases they put more in their mouths, less likely to wash hands....and a non vaxed (not sure what this has to do with a carpet cleaner) brings the herd vaccination levels down.

There are parents who have concerns - I did in relation to mmr. I am pro vaccine and my ds never presented with any immune issues. But I still had issues over overloading tiny immune systems with lots of vaccines all at once.

I had the mmr done seperately and yes it cost, a cost I could do without, but I felt that was best with us.

I understand where parents are nervous having done their research. They probably won't vaccinate.

What I don't get is where parents haven't done any research and instead rely on other children to get vaccinated. And there are alot of parents like that. I've met them. I've met a load from from my dh's country - a country that routinely does mmr - they are here and just decided not to bother and I was pregnant with what was a miracle (last chance saloon) natural pregnancy (with almost no chance of another) and I'm thinking to myself - I don't want to be near their kids, just in case. That's what gets me.

I do think that the OP's gp needs to back off now however, she's made up her mind and that's it.

"Ah, so not the government as a whole, individuals. That makes some sense"

Well a government, a health department, an immunisation service is made up of individuals. I'm sorry but what planet do you live on if this has only just occurred to you? Planet Fairyland perhaps?

"I'm not convinced by the WHO, do you have any data to back that up?"

you could try this

If you are interested you can find more. (I think there was a scandal within the last six months actually with people leaving their jobs but it might just have been in the last six months I read about it.)

As with a government, so with an international organisation. You don't have to be a confirmed sceptic to realise this.