I am rather opposed to the MMR because I think it's main driver is the nanny state who thinks they are going to make me get all or none. And I refuse to get it partly on the basis that I will not have the government telling me what vaccinations I am allowed to give my children.
My first cousin has a son who is autistic. I'm not very close to them and so don't know a lot of details. So, he is obviously my kids' second cousin. And on the slight possibility that the condition is genetic and my children could have it too (slight possibility because 2nd counsins are pretty distantly related), My first two have not had the MMR. DD (now 7) has had singles, and DS (now 5)has had measels and will have mumps and rubella when I can comfortably part with the £££ for it. The austistic cousin is a couple of years older than my oldest (DD). When I was pregnant with DD I heard that he was austic and I just decided that I didn't know if there was a link or not, but I wasn't prepared to take even the slightest of chances. Then when DS was born, I followed suit. I am now pregnant with a third child, and plan to do the same.
But, further to the MMR, I have noticed that the baby vax programme seems to have a few more jabs on the schedule than it used to. And I'm wondering if I really want them all. I'm okay with the 5-in-1 since they no longer put mercury in it. But not sure about the need for and risk of men c and pneumonia. I obviously need to do a bit of research but thought I'd start here.
Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
(I am not really interested in an MMR debate as I am firmly of the decision that we will not be getting that one in the form of a combined jab)