Vaccinations and nursery schools

[Louise1010]

This is my first post so forgive me if I do anything wrong!

I am just beginning to look at nursery schools for my 15 month old son, and I am a bit surprised that they don't seem to care whether or not he has been vaccinated. I expected it to be a requirement.

It seems incredible to me that I have to provide evidence of my cat's jabs to the cattery but when it comes to children anything goes.

Has anyone come across a nursery school in the UK that does require it?

Well, I had a lovely day at the annual dragon boat festival in flushing meadows park followed by oodles of noodles in a food court in flushing. Oh, wait, I thought this was a thread on vaccines, not what we got up to at the weekend.

I still don't get what you're upset about leonie. No, I can understand actually that you're upset that every silly statement you've made in completely wrong and has been demonstrated as such. If you don't like autism speaks, fair enough, but to get in a such a flounce about their stance on vaccines? Guess it pised you off big time that a high profile parent advocacy group broke ranks and actually reconsidered their position based on the growing body of scientific evidence. Good on them!

And I can see you're still carrying on being offensive yourself despite your hyoer sensitivity to your own feelings. But the difference between us is that I couldn't care less what you think (based on your slightly deranged, rude and irrational comments) and you certainly couldn't drive me to anger. Pity, yes but anger, no.

By the way in your link to autism speaks, leonie, theres not a word about curing autism. Just about early intervention to improve social skills and communication outcomes. And about treatment for accompanying medical disorders like gi problems. And about helping adolescents transition to independent adulthood and employment opportunities. seems quite logical and rational to me.

Makes your flounce seem even more bonkers!

Ok then

Just going to go look for the white rabbit...

Autism Speaks merged with Cure Autism Now in 2007.

This September you can join in the Crawlin for a Cure event for $30

It also mentions cure in their mission statement:

At Autism Speaks, our goal is to change the future for all who struggle with autism spectrum disorders.

We are dedicated to funding global biomedical research into the causes, prevention, treatments, and cure for autism to raising public awareness about autism and its effects on individuals, families, and society; and to bringing hope to all who deal with the hardships of this disorder. We are committed to raising the funds necessary to support these goals.

Autism Speaks aims to bring the autism community together as one strong voice to urge the government and private sector to listen to our concerns and take action to address this urgent global health crisis. It is our firm belief that, working together, we will find the missing pieces of the puzzle.

Autism Speaks. It's time to listen.

Laughing at the someone who 'admits' being in public health comment. Actually my current job is tangential to ph, more of a back-office role, but would love to get back into it. But it's certainly not an 'admit', it's a shout it to the rooftops. I'm proud of what I do, contributing to improving people's health and well being, it's what motivates me each morning.

Still no explanation for the hysteria, saintly.

Clearly there are some parents of autistic children who would like a cure. You don't. Still don't understand leonies flounce, especially on the heels of her own intentionally offensive comments and derisory remarks.

I haven't said whether I wanted a cure or not. I was just pointing out that you were in error for calling leonie bonkers for thinking Autism Speaks is interested in cure. Anyone who knows anything about autism knows that Autism Speaks is interested in finding (a) cure(s).

I'm not remotely surprised you don't understand leonies upset.

No, I said she linked to a page which discussed treatment with not a mention of a cure.

And we were discussing VACCINES and their approach to them. No one mentioned their approach to autism and whether they think it was curable or not or whether they represent the universe of autistic parents.

Leonie wanted an excuse to flounce to detract from the fact that she has no scientific basis to any of her statements. No, I can't understand it. Even more so given that she is intentionally offensive and provocative! It's almost like a Monty python skit!

And would you like a cure if one were available? Or would that be denying your child the right to be autistic?

Oh whatever Elaine, whatever.

Yes, I know, no explanation for it. (shakes head in disbelief).

Even more so given that she is intentionally offensive and provocative!

Alright, I've tried, but I can't resist. The words pot, kettle, black spring to mind.

I believe I was the one who was praised (by an anti-vaxer) for keeping my cool (preens feathers)

I was the one who was described as rude (preens scales)

I think it's a diversionary tactic piglet.

My kids do it all the time.

After all, leonie could have just said 'I don't agree with autism speaks policy on vaccines because of x,y,z' and provided the scientific evidence to back her claim.

Instead we have had tens of posts, of saintly comforting leonie, leonie telling us that she consoled herself with Krispy Kremes, a discussion of whether autism speaks thinks there is a cure for autism and why this is terribly offensive.

It's a very effective tactic!

Getting back to the op.

I still don?t understand why the freedom not to vaccinate is important, while the freedom to send your children to school with other pro-vaxers is not. A pro-vaxer being someone who either vaccinates or who would vaccinate were it not for medical contra-indications.

The only argument I?ve found on the thread, is that this would be a step towards compulsory vaccination. I assume those who are not pro vaccination think that pro-vax only schools would be better schools, so they would be forced to choose between vaccinating and sending their children to a poorer school.

Pro-vaxers are supposedly less intelligent (they misinterpret the evidence on vaccines), less industrious (they do less research on vaccines) and less capable of independent thought (endless ovine gags). If this is true schools for pro-vaxers would be poorer academically. So either the argument about a step towards compulsory vaccinations is bollocks, and so selection on vaccination is OK, or pro-vaxers are not stupid, in which case vaccination is safe. Which is it to be?

Hang on, so let me get this clear. "Autism Speaks" is discredited in your eyes because it talks about, among other things finding a cure for autism? I understand that for many people being on the spectrum is part of who they are and neither they, not their family andnfrineds would want them any different. But many others are miserable,in pain, unable to form fulfilling relationships, unable to function autonomously- are you wanting that it would b wrong to find a way to "cure" them? Or even to acknowledge that this might be in any way desirable?

I don't understand either, but shouldn't 'does autism need a cure' be a new thread? It's tough enough keeping the anti-vaxers focused.

Good point.

we might want to include in the question, the option that if a "cure" is developed, it should be optional and parents should have the opportunity to refuse it for their under-age children.