Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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

Delaying Immunisations?

81 replies

Spink · 15/04/2007 21:30

ds is due to have his 8 wk jabs soon. I'm pretty ambivalent about immunisations, have read up a little and found it all fairly confusing.
In the end, I don't want to take the risk of not immunising him at all. But I think I'd like to delay him getting them until he is a little older, so that he is bigger and stronger and more able to manage any side-effects (I hope).

What are your thoughts/advice on this? Has anyone else delayed their baby's jabs? what kind of reaction did you get from the medics? If I do postpone having them, how long should we wait?

Thank you

OP posts:
Original poster
Spink · 16/04/2007 16:03

anyone?

OP posts:
Piffle · 16/04/2007 16:09

I'm delaying ds's until 16 wks, this is because dd went off feeding big time and lost weight but coped a lot better at 16 wks...
HV thought I was bonkers but hey sod em, twas my kid after all

gess · 16/04/2007 16:09

I started by delaying ds2's (he still hasn't had them aged 5 ;o- but there are other reasons in our case). Ds3 is aslo officially delayed (he's 2!)

The only thing you can't do with the baby ones is spread them out, it's all of them at once basically- they don't do single versions of most of them.

Wuppertal · 16/04/2007 22:23

I guess it really is up to you but have you considered how ill your DS might get if he is unfortunate enough to catch one of these diseases whilst still tiny?
I had all the routine jabs done to my DS and (maybe I'm lucky...) he didn't get any reactions to speak of.

gess · 16/04/2007 22:31

the actual risk will depend on the disease and your family circumstances. For example hib is more common in children who are not breastfed and who attend day care (actually they';re not sure whether its day care or not breastfeeding so much that's the problem). It is worth weighing up the pros and cons for each jab, but the risk for each one will vary depending on your individual circumstances.

stitch · 16/04/2007 22:40

personally, i will take any and all immunisations going.
the risk from the vaccinations is far less than the risk from whooping cough, measels meningitis etc etce etc. i personally wouldnt depend on herd immunity
ds2 is booked in for a bcg in may. ds1 had a bcg when he was 9 months old as we were goingn abroad. after dd was born, i refused to travel abroad until after her first three lots of vaccinations were completed, even though it meant missing out on fun stuff.

its not worth the risk.

Wuppertal · 16/04/2007 22:44

Did you ask for Bcg as I believe the NHS doesn't do it automatically any more.
(Had the MMR done last week so bracing myself for delayed reaction next week...)

UCM · 16/04/2007 22:49

I am struggling with this at the moment as DD (11 weeks) was due to have her first ones 2 weeks ago, but didn't due to snuffles. I asked the nurse on the day and she told me not to bring her (I wouldn't have I don't think), she is booked in for this Friday, but has a stonking cold, is coughing with a bit of a Whoop and I am wondering whether it's croup or Whoop. Sure it's croup but you never know. In the meantime, she can't have her jab again........it's a minefield.

stitch · 16/04/2007 22:54

good luck ucm, hope she gets better soon.

ds1 was in 97. i asked for any extra immunisataions he could be offered as was travelling to bangladesh.
ds2, we were going to pakistan over christmas and took dc in for travel vaccinations. took them this long to get the system sorted to offer him the vaccination. we have been there and back already, but ill still take it.

nappyaddict · 16/04/2007 22:58

ds is 10 months and still hasn't had his jabs. he was sent to a&e by our doctor a while back and when they said was he up to date with immunisations i said no he hadn't had any yet. i was met with a why and look of disapproval. i then said cos he keeps having chest infections the doctors don't want to do them yet and she shut up.

nappyaddict · 16/04/2007 23:00

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Cazee · 16/04/2007 23:06

Wrote a long post, but it has somehow deleted, so the short version is I didn't vaccinate my children. It is a fact that the government have set up the Vaccine Damage Payments Unit to pay compensation to the families of vaccine damaged children. The risk is real, it is up to individual parents to judge whether they feel the risk of catching the disease is greater than the risk of vaccination. (and that is without even discussing the appauling reporting system for side effects of vaccines, or the auto immune diseases that present later in life that some experts suspect may be due to vaccination...) IMO

corblimeymadam · 16/04/2007 23:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

danae · 16/04/2007 23:18

Message withdrawn

UCM · 16/04/2007 23:23

Thanks Stitch.

1dilemma · 16/04/2007 23:30

Wuppertal to answer your question yes BCG has gone off the NHS routine list, however in some areas (Lambeth there are others) the rate of TB is I believe now above that at which the WHO recommends BCG vaccination for children so it has gone back on.
However I will prob refuse to have it since they will prob refuse to vaccinate my eldest at the same time!
Stitch that is a bad wait.
UCM hope it is a croup not whoop a lot of these things ar now so rare that people have trouble diagnosing them. Thought my youngest might have had measles the other day but no way of telling.

Original poster
Spink · 17/04/2007 09:04

Danae - have you got any recommendations on what I could read? I've read up a little but everything I've seen has been at one extreme or the other - quite difficult to find something balanced.

Wuppertal, I have thought about how awful it would be if ds had any of these horrid diseases, and that is why I think he will still have them, just not necessarily now (when I would've thought his risk is relatively small - he does not have lots of contact with other children yet). If only it was that straightforward (sigh). What I'm worried about is not just the immediate reaction to the jabs, but the poss long-term effects on immune function, which seems really unclear..
and I'm not convinced that the vaccinations are particularly effective, anyway. I heard that in the most recent measles outbreaks, children who had been vaccinated still became ill. Is this an urban myth or have other people heard this too?

I spoke to my HV yesterday and she seemed really supportive of delaying - I'm breastfeeding, which she said was protective for bub, and she also mentioned the 6 month thing being about mums going back to work rather than it being a medical risk type reason.

OP posts:
Malaleche · 17/04/2007 09:21

Am impressed this thread has got this far without becoming a slanging match!
I read 'Vaccinations - yes or no?' by Will and Lara Sussman. It doesnt advocate one way or the other just gives a lot of info to help you decide. I havent decided, jury is still out, but time passes I see them growing strong and healthy (and do everything i can to help them be healthy) and unless i can find single mercury-free vacs i wont do it. Mine (3.5 yo and 7 mo) are not vaccinated against anything but i would give them polio if i could get a single vac. I will get them rubella when they're older as they are both girls.

1dilemma · 17/04/2007 09:22

Yes spink, if you have been vaccinated in some cases it is still poss. to get infected
a)jobs not always effective in everyone
b)effect wears off (more relevant to adults!)
c)these things often rely on heard immunity eg need 90% of children to take it up, if more than 10% havn't been vaccinated then that population becomes vunerable to an outbreak.

I havn't heard the 6 month thing from my HV (but havn't asked!) would be interested to discuss it further, when schedule was started the vast maj. of mothers would never have been expected to return to work 6 month return has surely only become popular rel.recently with extension in paid maternity leave, will they be saying the same if the new mat. pay changes achieve the govs. intention and everyone stays off for 9 months? Also don't know what situation is in the US where people go back after 12 weeks. DDo they start in the delivery room?

electra · 17/04/2007 09:32

It's not an urban myth that you can catch a disease that you have been vaccinated against. Vaccination does have positive effect on disease control but it's not the miracle answer the authorities would have us believe.

WRT when vaccinations are given, I myself have not been able to find a clinical reason why babies are now given the shots so young. My GP did not know. I remember a Mner here saying that she had found out via her HV it has to do with wanting to get babies vaccinated early now that mothers tend to return to work earlier. When I was a baby they were given much later (starting at 9 months IIRC) I also asked my GP about why three courses of the shots are given and she shrugged her shoulders and said that in her opinion two "should cover it". So the basis for these decisions doesn't appear to be very scientific.

1dilemma · 17/04/2007 09:49

But I wolld expect a GP to know *&^% all about the rational behind vaccination schedules unless they have a particular interest. It's a public health issue.

aviatrix · 17/04/2007 09:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

electra · 17/04/2007 09:52

Yes but I've researched it and not been able to find a clinical reason (if anyone here has I would be interested to see it though). I also don't think it is acceptable for gps to know nothing about it because they are the ones parents are told to go to when they have concerns about vaccinations.

1dilemma · 17/04/2007 09:55

Not everyone can know everything . I'm glad it's not a slanging match, it's nice to be able to discuss this. I'm not trying to change anyones mind, just a couple of facts about jabs not being 100%, don't think I could change peoples minds any even if I wanted too, just as I can't imagine anyone on here changing my mind, but I'm still happy to discuss.

1dilemma · 17/04/2007 09:56

WOuld not expect the information that vaccination doesn't come with 100% guarantee to change peoples minds either way.

Swipe left for the next trending thread