why do parents refuse their baby / childs vaccines?

[bethjoanne]

in the uk we are so lucky to have an nhs---- doctors ,nurses ,treatments and vaccines we should be so grateful.in third world countries babies /children die of terrible diseases and also our relatives eg great great great grandmas would have done anything to have their children vaccinated IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE DREAM TO HAVE AN NHS AND VACCINES, instead they had to witness their child suffer i dread to think what they went through.
what country you are born in is luck of the drawer.
we should be grateful for medical care and vaccines available to us and have our baby/ child vaccinated.
i cannot believe some parents are so selfish and ruthless putting others at risk and starting an epidemic what happened in history and other third world countries .when the nhs is here to help and protect us now.x
ps think about babies 0 day old to 15 months who are too young to be covered /vaccinated.10 babies have died recently from whooping cough.also there has been 2 well known footballers had meningitis recently so there is reported cases,surely this needs nipping in the bud .
why are parents still refusing to vaccinate?

Because some of us, who have highly qualified scientists and statisticians within the family have done guided research using scholarly papers and research and made a valid decision based on our own circumstances, family genetic conditions, and knowledge about the agenda of the government.

Because I have a child who I was forced to vaccinate with a known faulty strain of the MMR vaccine despite his having a very bad reaction to the first part of the vaccine. And this was pre-Wakefield who has NO BEARING AT ALL on our decision.

Because I don't agree with the schedule or the combinations the the NHS offers. Too much too early. Because I think adults who have a valid choice about what they choose to put into their bodies can and should get vaccinated.

Now our child is older and we have some financial stability we will be making an informed decision about what is necessary (eg:polio, menengitis, etc.) and having them done in a controlled and sensible manner.

Because our first responsibility is to my child and family and not "the herd" or your family. As is yours.

Because I find it hard to trust a government (of any ilk) that has such deep and nefarious links with big business and big pharma,

Because we wanted to be sure that if our second child was on the spectrum that we knew why and weren't groping in the dark for excuses. So delaying the components of the MMR that we do decide to have was a good idea (but not the only reason we delayed).

Because my first child was damaged by the Urabe strain of MMR, and if you think the government isn't prepared to make the same sort of decisions again for "the greater good" then you are probably not familiar with the way that government works.

Because we live in a free country where we are allowed to make those informed decisions for ourselves and our families.

Because I know doctors who agree with me and who have chosen either not to vaccinate or to selectively vaccinate their own families, and have discussed our decisions with them.

Finally, I urge you to read this Nice sane Telegraph link to help you to understand why we made some of the decisions we did]]

So I look to the NHS,CDC, WHO etc and go by their recommendations.

@Elaine: But you realize that medical people also have their own preconceived ideas too? That they might think that 'Oh vax are good for you' so will, for example, have a positive paper on vax being publish wo much though but will look more deeply (and more likely reject) a paper that says vax are dangerous.
There is some research on that (even though not specifically on vax I don't think) that shows that preconceptions have a strong impact on whether a paper is published or not.
So we know that negative reports aren't published by pharmaceutical companies. We know that preconceived ideas means that some research papers aren't been published. And we know that half of the research published can not be reproduced (Note, the gold standard for good research is that it CAN be reproduced by anyone and give the same results).

On the top of all this, the NHS, WHO, NICE is then adding to the mix financial constrains to put forwards some recommendations.

Do you really think then that these recommendations will be the BEST one for your individual child? Would you actually trust that has been decided as the 'best' for the majority of people will be the best for yourself or your child?

Sorry, I can completely understand why one could feel overwhelmed byy all this information. And how you could think this is too much/too complex to really understand. But saying that all parents that take a decision do so out 'lack of knowledge' because 'if the NHS, WHO says so then it must be the truth' then this is also acting out of 'lack of knowledge'.

The reality is that, as a parent or as a patient, you are on your own to take the decision that you think is best for yourself/your child and it might not be the same than the one suitable for 'the majority of people'.

I will also add that NICE, WHO etc.. can have opposite recommendations. And that's wo talking about the variability of recommendations from one country to the next.

How do you know who is right then?

I agree with those who support choice. What should we do, force parents to vaccinate children and impose penalties?

That's a very dangerous road to go down.

Some people don't vaccinate because their child has medical issues that would make it inadvisable. There are some who have deeply held religious reasons not to.

The rest- because they don't understand the issue.

I'm with you op. Those who don't vaccinate are relying on those who do and those friends of mine who havn't vaccinated do live in fear of disease.

I hate conspiracy theories too and of course pharmeceutical companies are going to make a profit; they are not going to produce free drugs are they? (although we do get the vaccines for free). Thye need to pay the scientists, fat cats etc!

I don't feel that are kids are being treated like lab rats either. They have been vaccinated and therefore won't get the disease ; that's great isn't it? There is a real hippy mentality thst science is 'bad and against nature' and nature is 'good'. Measles and polio are natural but I don't want dd to get them.

I think you are missing the point here....
What's the relationship between the fact that you need to pay for a vax and the fact a vax might be unsafe for an individual?

My main frustrations that the ignorance and scare mongering is on both sides.

If you read mn or the Daily Mail you would be given to believe that a whole swathe of mothers (because we 'blame' the mothers don't we) are refusing vaccinations because their chakra was wonky and it is nearly a full moon.

Only really on this issue do we buy into lazy stereotyping and chose, with moral outrage, to stigmatise and beat up a group of mothers. Any other group gets help support and understanding in the face of witch hunts but this issue is one where even normally sensible posters get dragged into the name calling and pitchfork mentality.

Yet the truth is, if the majority see vaccination as something do safe, so essential to the health and well being of their child, why would otherwise sensible people chose to say no?
My experience is it is always fear. A fear often born of a dreadful unforeseen reaction to a vaccine and one which is made worse, more scary, by the casual dismissal of Doctors and then posters on here.

Telling a parent who is frightened to vaccinate because of something they witnessed, something which alarmed them, that they are selfish, a fucking disgrace and that their child should not be allowed to go to school is not really mn finest hour IMO.

I suspect some of the pitchfork wavers have their own experiences and their own fears which fuel these attacks.
But it is horribly cruel and self defeating.

People may enjoy the flaming. I don't for a moment believe that the queue of people lining up to shout abuse at last nights op was made up entirely of people who had the faintest interest in the issue. Certainly most had no intention of engaging. It was just all good sport - an issue where you could just compete to be foul about killing babies with impunity.
The fact that the op was genuinely scared didn't matter. If she wasn't frightened then calls from her GP would be as water off a ducks back. The calls scare her because she is terrified about making the right choice.

Most people have the luxury that vaccination is a no brainier. I queued up happy as a pig in shit to get ds1 vaccinated. Only once I had seen a terrible vaccine reaction did I have all that certainty evaporate and life since then is an agony of choosing the least awful choice.

Those who care deeply about this issue yet pile into aibu are helping no one. And jumping on a bandwagon to shriek at worried parents is shameful. Just because the media and a few hapless posters provide a stereotype of thoughtless refusal does not excuse laying into parents about a really difficult decision.
It makes me ashamed every time I see it especially from those who pose as academics and intellectuals. You should know better.

And now I am getting on the train to get pissed at the meet up.

I think this is quite interesting
""For example 5 percent of nonpediatricians would not use the Hib vaccine for their own child. Their reasons for declining the use of Hib for their own children included a lack of concern about the disease and the desire to reduce vaccines to a minimum. Similarly almost 5 percent of physicians did not use the MMR vaccine in their own children. According to the authors the reasons for vaccine refusal included ?the wish to avoid the trivalent combined vaccines because of safety concerns, the preference for infection-driven rather than vaccine-induced immunity, and the conviction that homeopathic treatment allows a benign outcome of measles, mumps, and rubella.? Almost 10 percent of nonpediatricians would delay the initiation of DTaP vaccination beyond 6 months and 15 percent would not give the first dose of measles or MMR before 2 years of age."

I refused the MMR for ds2 as he might have already had measles and I'd heard/read that having the vaccine as well could cause complications. I'm not sure where I heard it.

The HPA tests he had were inonclusive so I thought it was better to be safe, though I wanted him to have the mumps single vaccine but it wasn't available.

Then they said it was too late to give him the MMR even if I wanted it.

Sometimes people's reasons are not just hesitation or generalised unsureness.

Sometimes they are founded on a real concern - and getting any sort of unbiased info out of a nurse or DR at the practice is IMPOSSIBLE because as soon as you mention the word MMR, there is an audible click as their brain switches into autopilot and they reel off a load of stuff about how safe it is.

It is no good trying to find anything out.

Sorry inconclusive

I mean one of the swabs was positive, the others I'm not sure.

they reckoned it might have been because of maternal antibodies as he was 10 mo, and I was bf. But they couldn't say for sure.

But Crikey - that still means we can't trust it, as for example someone was talking about a large body of evidence giving weight to the theory. If there is an even larger body of evidence underminding the theory but we aren't informed about it then it's not exactly fairis it. How can people make an informed decision, it's impossible. I think parents should definitely be able to choose. I've done most of them but I think, if I try to persuade someone to do it - and they have a bad reaction - well quite frankly I'm not going round there to deal with the problem, and neither is anyone else, it's not up to me to take such and such a risk with their child - I won't be there to deal with the consequences. It's up to them.

I meant to say, undermining.

Also,how are you supposed to know if your child has a medical condition which involves a severe reaction, until they actually severely react? I think that argument is a bit of a cop out, it's too late then.

Applaud Pagwatch

Applaud RubyStolenBootyGates esp post at 07:41:42.

Part of the problem is that evidence supporting the level of immunisation given in this country (and other developed countries) is shaky. Many other things affect infant mortality, particularly good sanitation and nutrition.

A scientific article published a year ago finds that infant mortality rates increase with the number of routine vaccine doses: in other words, giving more vaccines does not result in fewer child deaths.

'That most of the parents of refusers are making decisions without knowledge is the simple fact of the matter, I'm afraid. If people don't have (and make little effort to get) the right information, how can they stand a hope of making the right decision?'

You're 'without knowledge' crikey if you think it's that simple a matter, or that what you think of as the 'right information' is and should be right for everyone.

'There is only one place people should get their information from - the medical community.'

And choosing to play along with the authoritative role the medical community take as the last word on any and every subject they encounter, also reveals your lack of knowledge and understanding of how the system actually works.

Some people don't believe everything they're told to do unquestioningly.

If you have such a strong faith in the underlying assumptions of scientific research, I'm surprised you're not happy with that.

parents that dont vaccinate because they have done lots of research and decided against it is one thing.

i was very shocked seeing two liverpudlian ladies on the news a while ago talking about NOT having thier children vaccinated but were then really shocked when thier children did contract a diesese i think it was measles - about how horrific it was?

that to me is so ignorant!

Lots of reasons why people don't vaccinate their children, hopefully those who make the choice (either way) have done some research for themselves and not just jumped on whatever bandwagon was trendy at the time. My cousin was born a perfectly healthy little girl and stayed that way until she was 13 months old when she caught measles and whooping cough. As a result she was in a mental institution from the age of 5 and died fairly recently from puenomia at the age of 50+ having spent the vast majority of her life in care. For me it was enough to persuade me to have all my children vaccinated. Other people argue otherwise, just make sure that whatever you decide you know why you have made that decision rather than base it on what the Daily Mail has printed this week.

Hi

This isn't really an AIBU question so we've moved it to the Vaccinations topic.

MNHQ

I just don't think it's up to anyone why people have made the choice, the fact is it's their choice.Not everyone can understand the studies, let's face it most of us don't. Unless you are willing to help with dealing with any difficult outcome, I don't think you should tell or order people to risk a difficult outcome.

I am pro vaccination, all dcs vaccinated for everything plus a few extras.
I totally support those parents who choose not to vaccinate because of family history or allergic reactions.
Those who dont vaccinate because they dont trust the government/read the daily mail/ believe conspiracy theories are not intelligent enough to raise children IMHO. (like i said just my opinion,no need for knicker twisting)

Id just like to put this out there though and see what others think.
I have worked in two very different areas lately, one very socially deprived and one quite affluent.
I noticed that 100% of mothers in the deprived area had vaccinated their children, every one, without fail.
However in the affluent areas there is a lot of children not vaccinated, for various reasons most saying that they dont believe in it or dont like overloadng their children systems or dont believe their children are at risk from these diseases

Whats that all about?

Perhaps it's an issue of better education. Better off people are generally better educated, but which comes first I don't know, the eduation or the being better off. But whatever the reason is, it's a broad truth. It would completely contradict the idea of non vaccinators not being intelligent enough to bring up children, which is quite rude I think.