Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Children's health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Anyone's child had the BCG vacination, if so why?

38 replies

bluetooth · 13/04/2010 09:26

My son 5 yrs has been put forward for this by the school nurse as my father is Indian (Mother English) but has been in this country for over 50 years, we do not have any relatives that go back and forth to Indian so he doesnt mix with anyone therefore doesnt have the risk in my opinion of catching TB.

Nurse left a message ages ago on mob saying about it and he could have it at school and she would send a letter detailing. Not heard anything until yesterday when I got a letter from hospital to say take him. He would be petrified, plus I do not know the ins and outs of the vacination itself, side affects and if it is really necessary for him to have it.

Im really reluctant to let him have this as its not a particularly nice vacination to have anyway

What do others think?

OP posts:

fishie · 13/04/2010 09:30

ds had it as a baby, we live in one of those places where it is still routinely done. ie lots of people from overseas plus 'high' rate of tb.

i didn't realise at the time that it was unusual to have it as all the other babies were. with hindsight i probably wouldn't, esp as it took more than a year to heal properly.

GoingPostal · 13/04/2010 09:36

ds did because we were living in an area of london at the time which had high rates of TB and as we spent a lot of time goings on buses, tube etc I thought it was worth it as he was probably being exposed to it. (though I didn't have it myself when offered at school, my mother refused it)

if you're not in a high risk area and you're not traveling to india or anywhere else with high rates, then I wouldn't. ds was lucky with his scab and he only has a tiny mark, but I know children who had massive festering scabs, infections and huge marks on their arm. now if there was a real chance of exposure then I would put aside the aesthetics and have the vaccination, but otherwise it is not standard practice. none of my friends who live outside London or in leafy suburbs or even other areas in london were offered BCG routinely for their dcs.

heading4home · 13/04/2010 09:45

My dd had it when she was very very newborn (as is routine in Portugal where we lived)and it healed with no problems at all. She doesn't even have a mark now, six years later.

However, I would agree with GoingPostal - if it's not really necessary, and he won't be exposed, then don't. It sounds like a fairly arbitrary recommendation based on your father's nationality, rather than any particular risk. Could you possibly discuss with your GP?

Original poster

bluetooth · 13/04/2010 09:53

Im waiting for the school nurse to call me as Im really miffed that she has just gone ahead and booked the hospital without explaining it and the side affects etc...

OP posts:

Elsa123 · 13/04/2010 11:46

Contrary to popular belief, its still common in this country and can be a real killer, especially affecting people who are immumo-deficient- so if they have it your child is at risk. Also, if your child catches it, the impact and scarring on their lungs can affect career choices in the future. Its a horrendous disease and much worse than the jab. We have a lot of immigrants in this country who come from higher risk areas too. On person on a plane can spread it to all other passengers.

Itsjustafleshwound · 13/04/2010 11:55

Both my children had the BCG jab as we visit family in South Africa.

It isn't a intravenous injection - just under the skin so the only side effect is a little scar which eventually heals.

There are lots of diseases and infections - I decided to get my children immunised as TB is not curable.

runnybottom · 13/04/2010 11:56

Mine have all had it at 3 days old, which is standard here. No problems at all.

Original poster

bluetooth · 13/04/2010 12:13

runny bottom - where do you live?

OP posts:

runnybottom · 13/04/2010 12:21

ireland

AMumInScotland · 13/04/2010 12:37

I would ask the school nurse why she is recommending this - if it's simply the family connection, then there's no higher risk for your DS than for any other child in the school. It sounds like she's just making an assumption that he'll be in contact with people who have travelled to India, or that he's likely to go on trips there, without knowing anything about your family.

mowcop · 13/04/2010 12:40

my friends 3 all had it as newborns, but her partner was regularly in and out of India.

kreecherlivesupstairs · 13/04/2010 12:44

My dd had it at birth because we were living in a very high risk country. I wouldn't be able to find the scar now.
OP, it sounds as if a lot of assumptions are being made.

angel1976 · 13/04/2010 13:19

Both my DSs had it done. I come from SE Asia where I guess there is still a risk and I also live in an area of London where there are lots of immigrants and they really encourage you to have it done here. We travel to SE Asia quite a bit (plus other countries) and I deem it quite necessary! I think you need to make the decision yourself but where I come from, we had it done as routine in school at age 12 and it wasn't really half bad.

Interestingly, when I was in SE Asia a few years back, they were trying to trace a whole planeload of people going from London to China as a 23-year-old British woman was found to be suffering from TB after she got off the plane. Also, if you are going to go to Australia as a student or as an immigrant, one of the things they screen for is TB so I really don't think it is as rare as most people think!

strandedatsea · 13/04/2010 13:24

Yes because we were going to be going on overseas postings - withdd1 jamaica and with dd2 Pakistan. I am glad we got it done when they were babies, as they didn't really know what was happening. I dread vaccinations now, it's so much harder when they are older so I sympathise with you.

mamakoukla · 13/04/2010 13:25

I had BCG as a child (6 yrs old). We were living in a small village in England when a young boy, just moved from another part of the UK, was found to have TB. All of the children were checked for antibodies and then immunised as a precautionary method.

There is some debate about the efficacy of the BCG as a vaccine but it is the best on offer atm (IIRC). Why do you think your child should not receive it?

AvengingGerbil · 13/04/2010 13:31

I shall be getting DS jabbed regardless of whether he's in a 'risky' category or not. TB was virtually eliminated in this country when we were all vaccinated at 12. Now it's back with a vengeance.

Original poster

bluetooth · 13/04/2010 19:35

Can I clarify - I remember lining up outside the Head's office when I was around 11/12ish and have this painful jab in left arm , left a bit of a lump, Im assumig this is TB vacination??? Dont children have it still as this age in the UK at school?

Im annoyed that it hasnt been explained to properly and I was sent a hospital letter saying go - actually it was for 8.3am the other side of the city and it said I may have to come back a few days later?!

I initially thought he doesnt need it, its a painful jab, he is 5 and at an age when he would understand, it may lump up etc... no family members go back and forth to Indian so why put him threw it.....However now looking at the other side of the coin and the reasons why some of your children have received it....Im re-thinking.

OP posts:

angel1976 · 13/04/2010 20:18

bluetooth - That's the one! I did the same in my school. LOL, I remember it was all false bravado, no one wanted their classmates to see them crying even if they were shaking in their boots.

I don't think they do it as standard here anymore. You might need a bit of research. I'm off the mindset that if you and your DH are both healthy with no underlying health problems, vaccinations are usually perfectly safe and will do more good than harm. Like another poster pointed out, a lot of diseases are now making a comeback due to people deciding not to vaccinate their children for whatever reason.

In my parents' time, we were all vaccinated without question.

mamakoukla · 13/04/2010 20:27

Could it have been for rubella? Prior to the introduction of the MMR vaccine, girls were vaccinated against rubella at around the age of puberty.

www.action.org.uk/our_research/our_successes/rubella_vaccine

With BCG, a scab forms and takes a while to heal. I can't remember a lump (but I was 6 yrs old!) but there is a definite scar - small and hardly noticeable unless you are looking for it.

AMumInScotland · 13/04/2010 20:33

If it was the BCG, you would probably have been tested a week or two before the injection - there was a thing called the "six needles" which just gave your forearm the tiniest little scratches. If you had immunity to TB, the 6 dots came up as your body tried to fight it off. If you didn't react, you had no immunity so you got the BCG. That's what they did at my school anyway!

My BCG definitely came up in a lump, and went pussey, and left a little round scar when it burst.... icky....

strandedatsea · 14/04/2010 19:17

Amuminscotland - that's right. Me and my brother both had BCG vaccinations when we were babies because we were born in Cuba where it was standard procedure. When they did the test for immunity st school, my brother got very, very ill - presumably with TB! Anyway my mum then refused to allow me to have the immunity test.

I recall both dd's lumps coming up all pus-y. But it is nice to know they are immune now.

notcitrus · 14/04/2010 19:30

In my London borough (Lambeth, lots of TB around) they do it for all babies at 6 weeks, so it was ds's first vaccination.

Total doddle.
As opposed to treatment for TB, which still involves really nasty drugs and weeks in isolation.

The bump on the arm can be a bit scary but a year later it's flat and hardly a mark.

tibni · 14/04/2010 19:39

dd had her BCG at a couple of weeks old, ds was older - after his triples had completed - because of a shortage of vaccination at the time. Mine were vaccinated because their grandad had had TB 20 years previously.

With dd I really agonised as she was so tiny and my first. Neither had any after effects.

Original poster

bluetooth · 15/04/2010 15:08

Right have spoken to the hospital as the nurse was very blasee about it all!

Apparently the TB vacination was phased out in 2005 (she didnt say it but sounds like it was down to costs as every child had it). Now the vacination is given to all children who have relatives or are in contact with relatives from a TB threatened country ie. Indian Africa, Cuba and she mentioned The UKraine - she said there are masses of countries on her list and many in Europe! She said it was the governments feeling that these children should be given the vacine so that they do not and I quote her actual wording on this "Infect the white british people born here".

I asked why he wasnt given it at birth and she said that it may not have been picked up on or not offered at that hospital but children that are "Black African, and its quite obvious because of their colour" are given it in hospital.

As my ds is under 6 and has not already travelled to a TB country he doesnt have to have the skin test, just the straight forward 1 needle injection. No real side affects but could swell slightly.

You can not have it done at the Dr's, you have to have it done at the hospital between 8.30am-9.30am - which is miles away so this is going to be fun getting through the traffic!

OP posts:

PixieOnaLeaf · 15/04/2010 16:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Flip

1 2