Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
General health

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

Original poster

MMR injections

190 replies

Smellen · 12/06/2006 21:14

Please could someone update me on the latest relating to the MMR jabs.

Is it now "safe" to let your baby have them? Is there any advantage/disadvantage to having the single jabs?

Sorry if this is another old chestnut.

OP posts:
Kathy1972 · 13/06/2006 15:11

eh? Sandradee's scaremongering but you're not, Tooticky? Really don't get that.

Socci · 13/06/2006 15:18

why is it that everyone I know (and I'm not just referring to your post sandradee) says "it's an emotive topic" before saying something offensive?

I am going to try not to get drawn into this but will leave with the following thought sandradee: all this stuff about society and looking after thy neighbour does not wash with me I'm affraid because when you have a disabled child the upstanding citizens of society are nowhere in sight, let me assure you. You are on your own. Sorry but that's the reality.

Socci · 13/06/2006 15:20

great - I can't spell now.

TooTicky · 13/06/2006 15:22

I'm countering. She started it.

sandradee · 13/06/2006 15:24

I think whichever "side" you are on you will find the other side "offensive" if you want to call it that. This is never going to be an issue where people agree.

Let's count ourselves lucky that we have the choice to vaccinate or not - in the US you don't get the choice and your child won't be allowed to go to school unless it's been vaccinated

oliveoil · 13/06/2006 15:24

I don't think it is a subject for tit for tat do you?

Read the archives!

Socci · 13/06/2006 15:25

In the US you do get a choice but people don't know about it.

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 13/06/2006 15:27

sandradee- My children aren't vaccinated (ds2 and ds3 aren't- ds1 is) but ds1's autism has cost us financially far far far more than £300.

Who said anything about love? The usual (wrong) assumption is that children like ds1 are the ones that are hard to love.

DS1 is fully vaccinated, I didn't just wake up one day, decide to knit muesli and not bother vaccinating the other 2. In fact I was a huge advocate of the vaccination programme. I also believed that if it went wrong and one of my children was adversely affected that they (and we) would be looked after. I was wrong about that.

\link{http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,647836,00.html\an old nick hornby article} but I think he summarises pretty well what happened to my public spirit.

Of course vaccinations have benefits, but they don't come cost free. Our genetic makeup is different and for some individuals the cost of receiving a vaccination is going to far outweigh the benefit, even if that is not true for the majority. Those people should be left in peace to do what is best for their child.

I rather like dipping my toe in - but I think it might be too many letters. My name is more a reminder to me though, to just go when it becomes too much.

mimitwo · 13/06/2006 15:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 13/06/2006 15:30

Not quite on your own Socci- thank god for other parents of disabled children (and the occasional person who has no reason to help but does- and stands out like a beacon because of it)

IN the US you can refuse to vaccinate on various grounds (religious/philosophical spring to mind- rules vary from state to stae though). I'm on American autism lists where siblings haven't been vacicnated and still attend school. Mind you the American's do a least provide early intervention sometimes.

sandradee · 13/06/2006 15:30

I have always said that there is a risk to vaccinations but I've weighed up which I would rather do. I still love my child and feel that I am doing the best by him. If anything were to go wrong I would have to live with my decision as a parent that I was doing what I thought best in my capacity as a parent. Ie I'm comfortable with my decision just as you are to not vaccinate.

However if my 6 month old caught measles from a child that was not vaccinated and died as a result of that I would be pretty p*** off.

Kathy1972 · 13/06/2006 15:35

Wouldn't it depend on the reason why that child hadn't been vaccinated, Sandradee? If someone has looked into it and has a very strong reason for thinking that their child is more likely to be harmed by the vaccine than the average child, wouldn't that be a different case than if they parent has just refused the vaccine as a kneejerk response to scaremongering without bothering to find out the facts?
I am very pro-vaccine but if I was in Jimjam's shoes I wouldn't have my younger children vaccinated either....

Socci · 13/06/2006 15:36

That's true Jimjams and I don't mean to sound bitter. sandradee - if you want to vaccinate fine but you shouldn't judge others who decide not to.

sandradee · 13/06/2006 15:53

Kathy & Socci - Yes - I do see your point and of course if I had an "at risk child" because of previous experiences then no I would not vaccinate. I have never said they are completely safe

What does make me cross though is when people choose not to vaccinate because of no other reason that it might harm their child - and here is no reason to think it would. It is selfish - sorry but it is. Not only to your child but to society - in which we all live.

The media and the web have a lot to answer to. there is almost too much information. I know that there have been issues with MMR - not only through the link to autism but also there was a leaked report claiming that over 18 children have died as a direct result of the vaccination which really is awful.

However do you really think that they would issue these vaccinations if the risks were greater than the normal risks for anything we choose to do? How many of you have child minders who regularly drive your loved ones around to the shops and on the school run. That's more risky if you ask me.

My heart does go out to people who have been affected and there will always be reasons not to vaccinate - it's just some are more valid than others. I'm still debating the next lot of vaccinations for DS - it won't be an easy decision but in the end I know that millions of people do it without anything happening.

TooTicky · 13/06/2006 15:56

I didn't mean to sound flippant. It's just that I am not a born debater and I wasn't sure how to respond to the accusation of scaremongering as that wasn't what I was doing. I just wish everybody was able to make an informed choice, not one largely dictated by the pharmaceutical companies and the ones who stand to profit financially from the sales of vaccines.

Socci · 13/06/2006 16:07

"What does make me cross though is when people choose not to vaccinate because of no other reason that it might harm their child - and here is no reason to think it would. It is selfish - sorry but it is. Not only to your child but to society - in which we all live."

Oh I see, so you have to go through all the heart ache of knowing your child is vaccine damaged before you have the "divine" right not to do it?? How are we supposed to know which children are at risk? And I think the possibility of harm to one's child is a very good reason to choose not to vaccinate. What about the individual child's rights? I have to make the choice on behalf of my children. I think that if I decided to vaccinate them firstly for the sake of other people then I would be a negligent parent.

And I do not trust the government because they were quite happy to put mercury in baby vaccines until 2004 for no other reason than cost effectiveness. It is not black and white - vaccines are not 100% effective and there are conflicts of interest when it comes to decisions the government makes about our children's health and well being.

mimitwo · 13/06/2006 16:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Socci · 13/06/2006 16:12

sandradee - sorry if I am wrong about this but it sounds as if you are saying that it is ok for a few children to be damaged by vaccination for the greater good and I find that really sinister.

sandradee · 13/06/2006 16:17

and I've made a descision on behalf of my child too. My choice was also based on his best interests first and foremost. A child is more likely to get measles than be affected by the vaccine. And 1 in 15 children who get measles develop severe complications.

Like I said I know it's not a black and white decision and we are free to do what we want to do but let's hope that for each of us it's the right decision. I'm comfortable with my decision. I just would be really angry if my son or daughter got measles because they could not be vaccinated / were too young to be vaccinated and died because of the actions of others. If you choose to live in society you should take some responsibility for being in society.

sandradee · 13/06/2006 16:19

no - it's not OK for some children to be damaged and others not. It's just that life is a risk and sometimes we have to look at the bigger picture. I have made my decision to vaccinate - despite lying awake at night worrying about it. It would have been easy for me to not vaccinate but I know that I have no reason not to vaccinate and that given the fact life is a lottery - my child has a greater risk of developing measles in todays society and dying from it than actually reacting to the vaccine. I did the vaccination to protect him - and yes off the back of that - others.

coppertop · 13/06/2006 16:20

I completely agree with Socci. I personally can't think of a better reason not to vaccinate than not wanting to harm your child - and I say that as someone who has had their children vaccinated.

Socci · 13/06/2006 16:21

"A child is more likely to get measles than be affected by the vaccine. And 1 in 15 children who get measles develop severe complications."

That is too simplistic - the risk will differ depending on the child. Do you have any evidence for 1 in 15 children develop severe complications from measles?

coppertop · 13/06/2006 16:23

"I know that I have no reason not to vaccinate"

Then you are in a more fortunate position than some other parents.

sandradee · 13/06/2006 16:25

I don't think we are going to ever agree. Basically I vaccinated to protect my child and you did not vaccinate to protect. It's as simple as that.

Socci · 13/06/2006 16:26

That's fine but where do you get the 1 in 15 statistic from? (genuine question).