What were your reasons for not vaccinating your child?

[Londonmamma]

I don't think we've done this for a while and I like to keep up to date on the vaccination issue so - fire away!

cold? cod!

it is heartbreaking to see vaccine damaged children. my cousin is one of them although im not sure which vaccine damaged him. i had no vaccinations as a child because of this but before uni i decided to have the mumps and meningitis ones.

i probably won't vaccinate ds either, although i might against those 2 as those are diseases that have been cropping up quite recently.

"I know a couple of people who don't vaccinate their kids because, as they say, "The kids are no longer at risk of X in our society". And that winds me up."

totally agree with that astrope. i also knew shall we say the hippie sort of people in my breastfeeding group, when i used to go to one who were CONVINCED that it was bm that was protecting their children from every single child illness on earth. I still bf my ds (nearly 3)and know that the reason he has not had most minor and more serious illnesses (i.e gut infections, ear infection, never been hospitalised, etc) is because his gut has never been exposed to formula milk. however i do not delude myself into thinking that my bm will always protect him against everything, because the scientific fact is that it doesn't.

i sometimes travel to countries where children are still dying of things that have been eradicated by vaccinations here in the idustrialised west.

would people who have NOT vaccinated here take the risk either for themselves or their infant, toddler, older child of travelling to a country where there are very high risks of infections of deadly diseases ?

i genuinley would like to know the answer to that although i think you are all going to say that you won't travel to such countries which proves my point really about people being relatively secure in their non-vaccination beliefs here because the rest of us ARE vaccinated (oh and i am not asking people who have children at risk of vaccination damage, i am asking those who didn't vaccinate for some other reason).

oh and ONE of the major reason i did vaccinate (but waited until the introduction of the 5 in 1 which no longer contains mercury or live vaccines) is that ds is and was bf and fully bf children generally have less averse reactions to vaccines.

My nephew was vaccine damaged in the 70's and now lives with 24 hr carers.

I had to think long and hard about giving dd any vaccine but decided that herd immunity was important to protect the kids who genuinely couldn't have it.

Dd has severe excema though so I left her MMR till she was 2 and asked for all the injections to be without mercury (which the doctors were happy to give but at the time I couldn't understand why I had to ask and why it wasn't just offered as tey had them in stock- but they were using uup the old stock first- stinks doens't it)

oh, i can't bear all this
DD2 is due her MMR this thursday, in hospital (she has an egg allergy).
she has a cold.
really don't know whether to go ahead (she is 19m). have already cancelled it once as she was ill.

i am worried about doing singles instead, as she has an egg allergy - at least at the hosp she will have it under supervision... in my head i also have convinced myself it will be the "purest" dose as it is for "at risk" children? though i know i have just made that up!

tell me what to do!

DD1 has only had first round of MMR... still to do booster and she is 3.2

No of course I wouldn't take my unvaccinated children to say India, or a polio region. However, my unvaccinated children have a severely autistic brother. Currently they don't get to go on holiday at all, Bognor Regis it outside the realms of possibility, let alone anywhere that involves a plane trip, so it doesn't come up. But that's a whole other thread.

A lot of the diseases you'll see travelling are related to poor sanitation though as well. It's not all about vaccination. Personally my view on vaccination is that the risk should be analysed for each individual before vaccination. I don't buy the idea that collateral damage is acceptable. I certianly don't think its acceptable when little effort is made to compensate those that pay the price. IN terms of the developing world- often I suspect vaccination is in the best interests of the individual (although not always- but there will be a strong individual potential benefit for many of the vaccinations).Clean water and a varied diet is also in their best interests.

ami- if you're nervous about either vaccination or the disease, you'll never get an definite answer. You just need to do what you think is right for your child. Personally I would avoid in general avoid any vaccination with a cold though- just in case the cold is early stages of something more serious (e.g. chickenpox for example). Unless there was a local epidemic of measles or something. We're coming out of cold season now anyway. If the cold was on its way out (so I knew it was just a cold etc) I'd be less concerned than if it was the beginning. I'd decide on the day though.

yr- I know you said you anted to hear from people who didn;t have kids at risk of damage, but you're going to struggle on mumsnet as the majority of people who have decided not to vaccinate have done so because of experiences within their family!

BTW for many UK children probaby the individual risk/benefit consideration would come down on the side of vaccination as well. I have no problem at all with people coming to that conclusion and vaccinating their kids, fine it's the sensible decision. I just get fed up when they then tell me I'm selfish, when my children have a completely different risk/benefit ratio. I could turn it back and say I think they're selfish for wanting me to put my kids at risk...... Do you see what I mean? I really really believe in assessing the individual risk for each child for each vaccination- wherever they are in the world- then it becomes ethical.

thanks gess
well she has had chicken pox already so it's not that.
she has had a cold for a couple of weeks, compounded by teething. she doesn't have a temperature - just runny nose and coughing at night. really nothing major.

anyone else!? would really value opinions as am in a tizz (and am usually v decisive!)

hi - I was the Op on the What exercises you.....thread....
and I was talking about certain hippyish parents I know who don't vaccinate their children for Human rights reasons, and who live in densely populated areas in inner cities. It really gets my goat, wrongly or rightly. I should have probably started a vaccination thread but I thought I could keep it light...(naive emoticon).
I'm NOT referring here to people with histories of vaccine damage, allergies (my dds have severe anaphylaxis so I had to delay vaccinating them till 5.5 and then do single vaccines, without mercury) or autism complications - although wasn't THAT MMR study totally discredited? Sorry have just skimmed so apols if already discussed this.
Just wanted to clarify position.

Sorry gess have just read your v informative posts. Is THAT what happened with the Wakefield thing. I see.
WHY IS IT SO DIFFICULT TO FIND OUT WHAT IS TRUE AND WHAT IS CORPORATE PROPAGANDA?
emoticon.

I hate vaccine threads.

I believe MMR in this country isn't cultured in egg now. Anyway there are studies that showed there was no more risk to the egg allergic than anyone else. Some places stopped routinely doing it in hospital for that reason. I know personally one child who had an anaphylactic type reaction to vaccine and still had MMR safely. Not sure I'd have done it but his parents did and they were right.

Leaving on one side the Wakefield issues even his team have said that once past 3 the average child's immune system is well enough developed to take vaccination. If your child shows signs of autism/gut damage I can understand not vaccinating but the average child - just don't get that, especially when they pass 3.

Probiotics help to boost the immune system. Omega 3 fatty acids seem to help that. Vitamin A may have a role to play too. Dose them up first with what you want but kids still die and suffer a lot of damage from measles.

I have no problem with those whose family history makes them wary of vaccination. For their kids sake as much as anyone's vaccinating the average healthy child is vital.

In an ideal world all the babies without risk factors for immunisation would receive the jabs. The disease would never reach epidemic proportions because of 'herd immunity' and those FEW children who had not been able to have the jab because of the associated risks would still be protected.

The problems start when the tiny risks associated with jabs scare off significant numbers of parents.

The reason that vaccines have been developed is that significant numbers of children used to die from them. If you have a normal, healthy child then you should feel a moral obligation to have him/her vaccinated to protect those less fortunate.

Sorry if that rattles cages - I know some people hold strong views on this.

What were your reasons ? I suppose the basic answer is that I don?t trust the Government!!

(1) The MMR was (over?)sold by the NHS as being a wonderful thing. Imagine my surprise when I found that they have to do a booster because the first shot is only 80% effective. I?ve just looked at a current Govt info site about boosters and found this little gem:

Q ?My daughter ?will be due a booster. Does she need to have it? Can we request a blood test first to check her immune levels??
A There are blood and saliva tests available that measure antibody levels to measles, mumps and rubella viruses but these were not designed to check immunity. These tests were designed on the basis of acute infection and not for the measurement of protection levels against these diseases. In fact, there is very little evidence about what are the protective levels of antibodies needed to produce adequate immunity to measles, mumps and rubella. WTF!!!?

(2) At the time, there was a lot of controversy over Gulf War Syndrome that was not being addressed (in fact, it was denied). In my mind, there were too many similarities between MMR and the multiple immunisation of the troops.

(3) If immunisation is so important then why did they insist that MMR was the only way to do it? I would have been quite happy with single jabs. Is lack of immunisation the fault of the parents or of the system?

(4) They never seemed to appreciate the statistics. The NHS may think that x% adverse reactions in the general population is acceptable but my child would not be x% affected, it would be 100% affected. Unless there is an adequate compensation scheme why should I risk my child (on a scheme in which I have no confidence) for the Greater Good?

My sister and aunt are epileptic and my mum was advised not to give younger sibs whooping cough vaccine. (I'd already had it, being older, but I still got whooping cough.)
When my dcs were born I read and read and talked to professionals on both 'sides' and decided not to vaccinate. This was not an easy or casual decision, but I did do a lot of research. Not everyone does, and why should they, and some people do and come to a different conclusion. There really are strong arguments on both sides, it's not clear cut.

My son is autistic, obviously not vaccine-induced, but with our family history I'm glad neither he nor his sibs have had jabs. I now know a lot of other parents of autistic children, some of whom suspect vaccs were 'to blame' and one who is certain. I've also read research suggesting that many vaccines aren't effective. I don't - can't - know what's truly the case, I'm just making the best decision I can for my own children; all any of us can do, and I have respect for anyone else who has to make it, whatever they choose.

I really don't think anybody has the right to judge other people whether they decide to vaccinate their children or not. You might say, 'well it's different if they are at risk of being vaccine damaged but for other reasons it's selfish, irresponsible' or whatever. We don't know what family traits or susceptiblities they may have, that has brought them to their decision. And I just don't buy the thing that children in the developing world are dying, so parents in the developed world have a duty to vaccinate. Of course it's a tragedy that these children are dying often unnecesarily, and governments and the international community should work hard at aiding people born in poverty. But that isn't fair to beat people with that, just because they have decided against immunisation. You just can't judge people's decisions as they are often complex, and really if they have decided to put their children at risk of catching the diseases over the risk of immunisation then they surely haven't done that lightly.

My DD has had all her vaccinations, except Mumps (decided on the single MMR due to individual circumstances - she was on antibiotics as a young baby, and had slight eczema, which she's grown out of now), as I was more worried about the diseases, but I would never judge anyone for their parenting decisions.

Oh, DD hasn't had Mumps because it's not due yet, should have said! (They like to leave 12 weeks between Measles and Mumps at the clinic I took her to).

agree with fortyplus, yellowrose and astrophe

my god most of us are SO fortunate to be in the position of worrying about tiny risks

utterly, utterly agree, we don't see these dieseases as a threat because, to us, they are NOT. Because of mass immunisation

measles, for example, is not a harmless diesase, even to bf babies. I have only partial sight in one eye as a result of catching measles as a young child-while still bf.

People have the jab on the persumption it will never happen to their child, that risk is always there. We need a test to enable us to find out those children at risk, you would have thought with all the money it costs to look after vaccine damaged children they would put it into better use to actually prevent it in the first place.

Thats if the government were actually doing it for our health and not to keep numbers up.

And I have no problem with people who choose not to vaccinate without specific 'family history' reasons either, nobody makes that decision lightly.

Does the risk of adverse reactions increase or decrease with the age of the child?

Are the diseases against which vaccination protects more or less dangerous the older the child gets?

If your children are unvaccinated (though you are unsure about your decision) and they have got well beyond early childhood without contracting serious illness, would that then affect your decision about whether or not to vaccinate?

and I do think this is a social issue

some kids CANNOT be vaccinated. they are immunosuppressed, eg due to cancer treatment

some pg women, for whatever reason, are not immune.

Those people are in need of the protection generated by herd immunity.

it is up to me to to make sure my kids don't do all sorts of thing that would impact adversely on society. My kids are part of society, as am I, and to an extent we do have to take risks for the good of a minority. IMO vaccination is one of those things.

(I would exclude children who were showing signs of autism or had a family history of it from this-though i have a friend-a scientist-with an autistic son who was VERY keen to get her younger dd MMR'd up because she reasoned that if he reacted like that to the vaccine, how would her dd react to the actual diesease?)

"People have the jab on the persumption it will never happen to their child, that risk is always there. We need a test to enable us to find out those children at risk, you would have thought with all the money it costs to look after vaccine damaged children they would put it into better use to actually prevent it in the first place. "

Hills, thats a lovely idea, but i don't think anyone KNOWs what causes autism

we know what causes measles, and we know that measles causes all sorts of crap. let alone diptheria etc. My MIL had whooping cough as a 6 year old (from an affluent family) and now, 63 years later, she still cannot breathe properly. We KNOW what causes stuff like this-the diesases we are vaccinating against