Be gentle - single MMR jabs vs combined question

[ZeussCat]

Hi

DS has had the single measles jab and coped fine, thank God. I personally don't believe vaccines cause autism - or perhaps I am on the fence over whether vaccines can trigger various conditions, as a fairly anxious parent.

I'm wondering about my decision atm and if he should have the combined before he goes to school, currently he's in pre-school and I have decided for me vaccinating against MenB was more of a priority to me so I did the single measles and left it there while I made my mind up (I space out his jabs)

but honestly this is coming from a fear that other parents will ostracise me if he was to catch mumps/rubella rather than my fear of him actually having either of those in childhood.

I'm aware that the single mumps and rubella vaccines have been stopped in the UK

Wondering if there are any english speaking countries nearish the UK where it's still possible to pay for single jabs for the other 2?

We have always planned to give him the MMR before adolescence...

Please don't bash... anyhow, anyone know if singles are possible anywhere in the meantime?

I don't think single mumps is being manufactured any more so it really is MMR or nothing.

DS1 got mumps before the jab so I insisted on a single measles jab. DS2 had single mumps and measles because they were still available.

Both boys so no need for rubella, imo.

Family has a history of allergies and bad reactions so single jabs were our choice and the GP agreed.

Just give him the MMR. You are planning on doing it anyway when he's older.

Yes I am mcdog but I feel less concerned over giving it when older. Also both parents have to be in agreement and due to allergies the only one his father was happy with was the single measles but now it's been given within the last few months I don't know how long is safe before he could have mmr anyhow so was wondering if was any way (not necessarily in UK) to obtain the singles iyswim until he's older

Mythical - your boys may come into contact with pregnant women. It is still important to immunise boys in my opinion, just more important to girls.

Thanks mythicalkings

Can I ask what your experience of DS having mumps was? I'm assuming was some years ago as you say single was still available for ds2? How were other parents towards you? Did you know who he caught it from or passed it to?

I did follow GP advice myself but looking up the mmr details online I think I was given outdated advice and they've decided it's now safer even with egg allergies

Does your son have proven allergies ? My DC has very severe allergies and the only place that would consider giving her MMR was our local hospital.

IME the NHS are fairly cautious with allergic children. We tried to give it twice but on both occasions she reacted to a tiny amount being placed under her skin. Our consultant spoke with an expert in drug allergies and the vaccination has been delayed further.

I certainly wouldn't entertain vaccinating a properly allergic child anywhere other than in the UK tbh.

Oh god you make an excellent point lavendersun. Perhaps it would be reckless to consider that, he has a few allergies but my understanding was the bit they were concerned about was the egg and as there's a single measles without we did that

I think I will contact the Dr and see if any of the rubella is still in stock I looked up privately and most places are out by the end of this month but not sure he's had enough space between to do it yet

Have you asked your GP whether they would be happy to give the vaccine in the surgery or not? If they would then I would suspect that they consider the odds of an allergic reaction small.

Do you see an allergy consultant? If so I would ask them.

I wouldn't consider taking my daughter anywhere other than a hospital setting for vaccinations. I wouldn't take her to a private doctor unless he was in a hospital setting. But we carried two epi-pens for a very long time.

I would consider the severity of your son's allergies the key here and the view of your GP.

I think I will go back with an arms length list of questions this week. We did delay shots and have done some privately and he's had minor reactions and some none at all so perhaps that means he's very low risk ... Either way I need more information I think

Ugh if only parents still had the choice of singles

Mythical - your boys may come into contact with pregnant women. It is still important to immunise boys in my opinion, just more important to girls.

I feel that everyone has to take responsibility for him/herself. A woman would have be very irresponsible to get pregnant when she isn't immune to rubella and the jab is so widely available. I had the jab before trying to conceive, it wasn't available when I was a child.

Zeus we never found out where DS1 caught mumps, he wasn't yet at nursery. It was going around and he must have picked it up when we were out and about. He had a couple of uncomfortable days but he wasn't particularly ill. he only had it on one side and was quite proud of his "mump". I kept him in and, as far as I know, he didn't pass it on to anyone. I was pregnant with DS2 at the time, which is why he didn't get it.

It was over 30 years ago now and single jabs were still available when they needed them. We had to pay for the last measles one, I think.

I'd be very surprised if other parents ostracised you because your child was ill (and if they did, then they are dicks who you wouldn't want to associate with, no?) Even vaccinated children can catch these things, because all vaccinations have a small failure rate.
I am very strongly pro vaccination, but I can understand why people with allergic kids are very cautious, and rightly so. It's up to the parents of the non-allergic kids to get on with vaccinating theirs so that we have herd immunity for everyone.
Thank God the hysteria over MMR has died down now.

Thanks clobbered, I hope they wouldn't. I think perhaps I'm basing my fears on the way a few threads have gone on MN that iv read through while trying to figure this out.

I'm a terribly shy and sensetive person who suffers with anxiety and some days feel I would rather homeschool and hide from the world but that wouldn't be in DS best interests. Trying to navigate through all these parenting decisions is really stressful

Clobbered, where it is warranted it isn't just the parents being cautious, the professionals are too, very cautious. The professor of drug allergy at a major trust advised our consultant to leave it.

I wouldn't have considered single vaccines in our case because they wouldn't have been administered under supervision of a consultant in a hospital.

I remember the consultant and a staff nurse checking that the emergency kit was in order before trying the first time with my daughter.

I do feel that single vaccines are almost a lifestyle choice in many cases and one that almost dilutes attitudes towards serious cases of not being able to have vaccinations.

People who are unable to have them are why everyone else should.
If allergic, you shouldn't worry about what others think.

Yes... I suppose I don't know which camp I am in though... Hence being cautious but also troubled that he's started nursery.

I feel that everyone has to take responsibility for him/herself. A woman would have be very irresponsible to get pregnant when she isn't immune to rubella and the jab is so widely available.

^^ This is a pretty horrible sentiment. What if your boys encounter a pregnant woman who wasn't able (allergies are one reason but there are others) to have the rubella vaccine safely? Such people rely on everyone else being immune to minimise their chance of infection and keep their babies healthy.

All is takes is a handful of unimmunised people like your boys to spread a dangerous infection to vulnerable groups.

My DCs suffer from severe allergies, their well-being was a greater priority for me than women who weren't immunised. The GP agreed with that.

If women who aren't immune choose to become pregnant that's a choice for them to make. Risk the jab or risk the possibility of coming into contact with rubella.

Zeus, we gave our DD the single measles vaccine in ? 2002 At the height of the MMR controversy. By the time she was in nursery or reception , the Wakefield research was being questioned and following a good discussion with our GP I felt happy to give her the MMR. So she has had a single measles vaccine followed by MMR. Best Wishes with your choice.

If women who aren't immune choose to become pregnant that's a choice for them to make.

Sure, because all pregnancies are meticulously planned. Nobody ever becomes pregnant unexpectedly.

And by the way, not giving your boys the rubella vaccine because they have relevant allergies is a completely different rationale to not giving them the rubella vaccine because you think it's not important for boys and pregnant women can just look out for themselves. Your previous posts made it very clear that you subscribe to the latter rationale.

How utterly, utterly selfish.

Maybe I should have said both were boys so not a difficult decision to make, given the history of allergies. The GP and I both thought it was the best, given their allergies.

I trust her word. Some unhinged woman hurling insults around on a forum haven't made me change my mind.

mythical It's interesting to see you try to climb down from your previous unpalatable position:
A woman would have be very irresponsible to get pregnant when she isn't immune to rubella and the jab is so widely available.

... by now saying it was all down to your GP's perfectly valid judgement of calculated risk regarding allergic reaction to vaccine components.

Can you honestly not see that these positions do not go hand in hand? One is a selfish denial of the value of herd immunity, and the other is a relative risk decision of individual health. You can have one without the other, or you can have both together. I am critical of anyone who makes statements like the one quoted above because they are indefensible.

But if it's easier not to think about it and continue to call me names (I'm mildly annoyed, not unhinged ), then go right ahead. I believe you when you say you won't change your mind. Other people reading this thread might, though.

I'm not climbing down. I do believe exactly that, people have to take responsibility for their own health. There will never be full herd immunity which is why women should have the rubella jab - as I did -and not rely on other people to have it.

Did you read my first post? I mentioned my GP and the allergies there. I don't think it's selfish to put the health of my DSs before the potential risk to strangers who have chosen not to be immune.

I don't think any parent who looks out for the heath of their children is selfish.

"Full" herd immunity is a misnomer; it's a sliding (nonlinear) scale of probability of infection. If everyone were immune, the disease wouldn't exist and we're not talking herd immunity any more.

So let me spell it out.

Deciding not to vaccinate your dc because medical advice was that their risk of allergic reaction was unacceptably high = not selfish.

Believing that women are "very irresponsible" to get pregnant when they aren't immune to rubella, and that such women have "chosen not be immune" (despite the fact that not all women can have the vaccine, and herd immunity is an aim of population health partly in order to protect such vulnerable groups) = selfish.

So (in a similar patronising tone) let me spell it out.

If you are a woman and you choose not to be immunised against rubella when there is no medical reason for you not to be then that is selfish. Far more selfish than choosing not to have allergic children immunised.

If you are a woman who has allergies and has been advised not to be immunised then you have to choose whether or not to become pregnant. To expect highly allergic people to be immunised to protect you is selfish.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that we have to take responsibility for our own health?