Parental Consent for Vaccine

[naughty40me]

news.sky.com/story/covid-19-12-to-15-year-olds-to-get-final-say-over-covid-jab-if-disagreement-with-parent-occurs-12401914

Not sure if link worked, never done it before.

Sajid Javid saying that parental consent for the vaccine won't be needed if the child decides to take it.

I am livid at this!

I have a 2DC 12 and 14. I really do not want them to have the vaccine.

I am going to have to sit and have a proper discussion with them.
Up to now, when it has been mentioned all my kids say is "but if we don't have the vaccine we won't be able to go to the cinema"...

I'm not anti vax. I've been double jabbed myself being over 40 with long term conditions and in the vulnerable category.

However, as the JCVI says, the benefit to healthy children in this age range is marginal.
I am worried about side effects, both short and long term.

I think vaccines should be a choice.
Those who want their children vaccinated should have that choice.
But those of us who don't should also have a choice.

I don't think my dc are capable of making a fully informed decision. They are children fgs.
They are having their heads filled with crap, making them watch Newsround every day in school for example.

I feel so strongly about this.
I honestly think they will end up making it a condition of school entry.

It's so wrong.

I know not many on here will agree but I for one am not happy about this at all.

@naughty40me

If you’re children are 12 and 15, their view on THEIR medical treatment is all down to them now. You can’t override their consent if they are considered by medical professionals to be Gillick competent.

@MajorCarolDanvers

12 to 15 year olds are perfectly capable of making this kind of decision for themselves unless they have special needs.

But not perfectly capable of deciding if they want to smoke, or drink alcohol, or drive a car, etc. etc.

As usual, children are only children until it's inconvenient for the government.

@MajorCarolDanvers

12 to 15 year olds are perfectly capable of making this kind of decision for themselves unless they have special needs.

Yet the expert panel of the JCVI cannot.

Yet the expert panel of the JCVI cannot.

Hardly the same decision, is it? Speaks volumes that we've got people confusing the issues surrounding individual vaccination with the issues surrounding vaccination for a population as a whole. That's been the problem all along.

Yet the expert panel of the JCVI cannot.

Again, they have specifically stated that the direct medical benefits are marginal, however there are other harms associated with coronavirus infection that will impact children that they have not considered in their decision. This is why they referred it to the CMO and others.

I am slightly aghast at how this government is handling this, you can not strip parents of their rights and responsibilities for their children overnight.

If the child is over sixteen then of course they can consent, but any child under the age of sixteen (if the vaccines go ahead for the younger age bracket) should be only applied with parental consent, in the same way we consent to other vaccinations, school trips or anything that involves risk.

There is an element of risk to the vaccine according to the scientists, it also hasn't been approved by the JCVI so of course some parents will wish to decline on the grounds of safety and it should be their right to do so.

It will be a very dark day for this country if the government ride roughshod over parents consent and wishes, that and the NI rise all in one single week, I am wondering what on earth is going on.....it is like Boris wants families and younger people to never ever vote for him again.

But not perfectly capable of deciding if they want to smoke, or drink alcohol, or drive a car, etc. etc

None of those are medical decisions though are they? If you can’t see the distinction I don’t think anyone can give you an answer you’re going to be happy with.

Imagine a child who needs a blood transfusion but their parents are strict Jehovah Witnesses who, for religious reasons, object.
Than, as pp mentions, they have been undergoing chemo for cancer , the parents want it but the child hates undergoing it again
A child of 12 whose parents have divorced who is asked which parent & has already stated which parent they do not want to live with
I think you underestimate most children & there are more cases - sadly sometimes children's wishes are ignored (in divorce etc)
Children will & have missed out on education & this has a major lifelong effect, particularly with children who come from deprived backgrounds where they are already disadvantaged - the vaccine is vitally important for levelling the playing field. the advice to giving the vaccine from my recollection was not about the risk so much as the advantage & they STATED how narrow this remit was & that social (& educational) issues may well play into why it should be given.
There is also the fear of mutations & while it may not protect completely it does give protection against severe disease.
lets not forget how many children have had asthma in the past or those who may well develop side effects from covid - & the possibility of increases in type 1 diabetes which it may well cause
Caution has to be considered on which vaccine will be given but there are many examples of vaccination of this age group across the world

It will be a very dark day for this country if the government ride roughshod over parents consent and wishes,

How? If it goes forward, the vaccine will be offered to children in this age group. It doesn't mean they have to have it.

I really doubt the numbers of children going against their parents wishes on this are going to huge, and that they can't be resolved with discussion (i.e., that the child is capable of deciding whether they do or don't want to be vaccinated.)

@zenthoughtsonlythanks where do you stand on under 16’s seeking long term contraceptives without parental consent or counselling without parental consent?

@zenthoughtsonlythanks

I am slightly aghast at how this government is handling this, you can not strip parents of their rights and responsibilities for their children overnight.

If the child is over sixteen then of course they can consent, but any child under the age of sixteen (if the vaccines go ahead for the younger age bracket) should be only applied with parental consent, in the same way we consent to other vaccinations, school trips or anything that involves risk.

There is an element of risk to the vaccine according to the scientists, it also hasn't been approved by the JCVI so of course some parents will wish to decline on the grounds of safety and it should be their right to do so.

It will be a very dark day for this country if the government ride roughshod over parents consent and wishes, that and the NI rise all in one single week, I am wondering what on earth is going on.....it is like Boris wants families and younger people to never ever vote for him again.

Gillick competency has been in place since 1985. People under 16 have always had the right to access (or refuse) medical procedures since then. It’s not a new thing. You give your parental consent but the final decision lies with the child.

I won’t ever vote for Johnson or his party but that has nothing to do with applying a legal ruling from 36 years ago.

Or to put it another way, I don't see the logic in that all children should be denied the option of having the vaccine just because a small proportion of parents are concerned their own child will go against their wishes.

@Barbie222

Yet the expert panel of the JCVI cannot.

Hardly the same decision, is it? Speaks volumes that we've got people confusing the issues surrounding individual vaccination with the issues surrounding vaccination for a population as a whole. That's been the problem all along.

How are people confusing it? Seems far more likely they are just weighing up which comes first between their children and wider society and lots of them are unsurprisingly deciding their children do, especially as wider society doesn't seem to give two shits about kids and young people, other than making sure they contribute to herd immunity and pay their pensions and social care.

Regardless of how you feel about your child having the vaccine, this does set a very worrying precedent. We should all be concerned that this this does reduces parents rights to decide what is best for their own child.

The kind of state control and intervention we would see with mass childhood vaccines being delivered without parental consent is a really scary prospect.
It is what you would expect to see in China. When you weigh up the lack of recommendations from JCVI it looks even more frightening. There is going to be a huge backlash to this. I can't believe it has even been suggested.

My DD age 12 is due her HPV vaccine next week. I have no qualms about that but if I did not give permission I can't really see anyone from the school or immunisation team bothering to talk me out of it.

Wouldn't she be able to have it even if you said no?

@zenthoughtsonlythanks

I am slightly aghast at how this government is handling this, you can not strip parents of their rights and responsibilities for their children overnight.

If the child is over sixteen then of course they can consent, but any child under the age of sixteen (if the vaccines go ahead for the younger age bracket) should be only applied with parental consent, in the same way we consent to other vaccinations, school trips or anything that involves risk.

There is an element of risk to the vaccine according to the scientists, it also hasn't been approved by the JCVI so of course some parents will wish to decline on the grounds of safety and it should be their right to do so.

It will be a very dark day for this country if the government ride roughshod over parents consent and wishes, that and the NI rise all in one single week, I am wondering what on earth is going on.....it is like Boris wants families and younger people to never ever vote for him again.

Other child vaccinations can already go ahead at school without parental consent. It isn't unique to the Covid vaccination. Parents are asked for consent, but if they don't consent, then the child's opinion is already sought for the current school vaccination programmes. You can say no to the flu vaccine, or HPV vaccine, but your teen can overrule you on the day. Their body, their choice, unless it is felt they don't understand the situation.

Also those that have said the teachers/school wouldn't dare go ahead without their consent...
The teachers/school won't get involved, they just provide the venue and pass on any completed forms, it's the vaccination team that make any medical decisions.

Do they ask the kids why if they decline a vaccine ?

Out of interest, OP, do you think a parent who wanted their 15yo to be vaccinated should be able to force that on the child if the child was able to articulate clearly and firmly why they did not want it? Or does parental preference only apply when it comes to stopping them from getting the jab?

carrie Your child may well be law be able to have medical treatment, but it very rarely happens in reality. I have to sign forms when my child needed an operation. My 12 year old was not asked to, indeed they didn't even explain the surgery to her. In the same way I sign forms for trips, sports fixtures, vaccines at school. My children have never been asked to make the decision, it has always been the parents.

IF the policy was rolled out nornally - ie parents were not asked to give consent for anything this might not seem so alarming, but given I am even asked to sign forms for dental work and braces for my 15 year old etc it is normal practice to have signed parental consent. Not for the child to decide anything. This decision, if it goes ahead, will be very controversial. It is unfair to place the burden of such a complex and emotive issue on the door step of schools. As if they haven't enough to contend with.

But not perfectly capable of deciding if they want to smoke, or drink alcohol, or drive a car, etc. etc.

Can you not tell the difference between these things and being able to make a choice about health care?

I’ve been trying to find out what the government have actually said re. Parental consent. It seems the education minister said that parental refusal will only be disregarded in “rare” cases. I was trying to think of an example of a “rare” case as he did not spell this out and I assume it would be in the case of say a CEV child where the vaccine benefit is more obvious.
So not a blanket disregard of parental consent for the vast majority of 12-15 year olds ( where parent does not give consent) as far as I can make out anyway and I presume a judge would need to decide with medical advice in any case rather than the school nurse or Head Teacher in the school.
A judge presumably could also make the decision that such a child is not Gillick competent too. I guess it would depend on the individual child and their understanding, medical circumstances, expert opinion of risk/ benefit etc so safeguards in place ( as there should be)

Parents are asked for consent, but if they don't consent, then the child's opinion is already sought for the current school vaccination programmes

In reality this never happens. Parents wishes are always respected in my experience. We had a few opt out in our school due to religious reasons, the children were left back in the class room whilst the other children were vaccinate, no one approached the children without consent to ask them about their feelings on the matter. Without consent, there is no way the school would press ahead. The consent does have meaning. Particularly if the child is only twelve years old, where one could contest competency. It will end up in the courts, as this really is a very important point if parental consent is now irrelevant.

Can I say at this point none of my children have ever received a vaccine without my consent.

In fact I even have to sign my consent for my asthmatic child to use an inhaler, to be given pain killers and first aid in an emergency.

Such is the litigation around consent. The idea that a loop hole can be used to vaccinate children on mass in schools without consent, is really contentious and I am not sure it is entirely legal with the younger children. It would have to be proved that a twelve year was able to weigh up the risk of something like myocarditis with the alternative etc etc. There aren't many twelve years that will fully appreciate what is going into their bodies either with the mRNA being a new vaccine. Many adults don't even understand it fully.

I am all for vaccines, but only with parent's consent.

I remember lots of parents opted out of the HPV vaccine (iirc) for their daughters in my kids primary school for “religious reasons” ( catholic school).
No girls would have been or were vaccinated against their parents wishes. It would have caused absolute uproar and massive ill feeling. The parents I know would have hit the roof.
I consented readily and didn’t really understand the parents issue with this vaccine but utterly and completely respected their right to decide for their own daughters.

Same for us sasha catholic reasons and I can't imagine any school ignoring the wishes for parents for any reason.

Unless it is literally life and death, and maybe there is a case for it but that can not be said for this vaccine at all.