Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

General health

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

Would you expose your child to chicken pox deliberately?

70 replies

Yorkiegirl · 08/12/2004 08:38

Chicken pox is going round near me now. DD1 had it when she was 8 months and sailed through it. DD2 is now 8 months, and if she could get through it as easily as DD1 did I would like her to have it now!
WOuld I be a really bad mother if I exposed her to it now? Is she too young?
She's still bf so her immunity may stop her from getting it anyway!
Please don't judge me if you think I'm awful....

OP posts:
FimboCLAUS · 08/12/2004 11:45

Sorry that should have started dd..

ItllBeLonelymumThisChristmas · 08/12/2004 11:46

No, I wouldn't specifically put them in contact with chicken pox but I wouldn't worry about them catching it either. My three eldest had it all toogether and although the middle one had a bit of a temperature one afternoon and slept that day, that was all they suffered. The others were fine, including the baby who was covered in spots.

Now, I only have number four who has not had it. If he gets it, fine, if not, I won't go looking for the illness.

NotQuiteCockney · 08/12/2004 11:48

I deliberately exposed ds1 to it when he was about 20 months, he sat in a wading pool with an ill friend. He didn't get very ill at all.

And that's why - because generally the younger you get it, the less severe it is. Getting it is more or less inevitable, and given the severe risks if you get CP as an adult (pregnancy issues in women, sterility in men!), I'll happily expose DS2 to it when he's old enough.

Of course, if your child is likely to have real problems with chicken pox, (if they're immunocompromised in some way?) it might be worth looking into the vaccine. They use it in the US now.

Gobbledigoose · 08/12/2004 11:53

YG - friends of mine did this summer. My ds2 and a friends ds got it at the same time first and there's a big group of us that meet every week. We all just carried on meeting regardless because we felt it'd be easier if all the kids (within a family of course) got it and then it would be over with. I was also due to give birth a few weeks after this so I really wanted both my ds's to just get it over with before the baby arrived. Plus, we'd have all gone stir crazy over the summer if we didn't meet up - what with the 2 week incubation period as well! All of ours ended up having it over about a 5 week period! About 8 kids - none of them were poorly with it, just spotty!

I know people who've had it when they were adults and it's been really bad so personally I'd want it over with while kids. My friends dd had it at around 10 months and again, wasn't really poorly, just spotty!

I think if I were you, I'd perhaps not go out of my way for her to catch it now, but not particularly avoid it either. If she doesn't catch it now, she probably will at some point in her pre-school years anyway - particularly if you are around other children a lot.

ChristmasBOOZA · 08/12/2004 11:55

Agree with people raising the Christmas issue. But then again you're a teacher aren't you - so as far as childcare is arranged it might be good timing.

I took my DD to a party where the little boy had chicken pox at age 4 months. But his spots had only come out that day and DS had already been playing with him that week at nursery(when he must have bee infectious), I had promised DS he could go to the party and had no babysitter so although the mother warned me I didn't have that much choice.

DD didn't catch it but DS did (but he'd already been exposed to the child). So inevitably DD caught it a couple of weeks later (actually a month before her spots came out because DS's were a couple of weeks coming). DD was really poorly with it and we came back from a caravanning holiday early because we couldn't cope with looking after her. It was cold and we needed to be well wrapped up, there wasn't a proper bath etc. DD was thoroughly miserable and two months later some of the spots in her groin/on her back have not cleared up. She was exclusively breastfed at the time.

However two of my friends deliberately exposed their children to DS and DD. One had also taken hers to the birthday party. Hers didn't catch it but the other friend's did and her DD was 9 months at the time and really not bothered by it. She was in a similar position to you yorkie - ie on solids but still breastfeeding.

ChristmasBOOZA · 08/12/2004 11:58

DD had lots of spots round her eyes which she kept rubbing (in a tired kind of way rather than scatching) so spent lots of time wearing a nappy and some bright pink mittens.

Also remember GeorginaA going through a worrying time when her DS had it when she was pregnant. So think it is a good idea for girls especially to get it as children.

TheHollyAndTheTwiglett · 08/12/2004 11:58

yes you should expose her to it (well I would) .. I did with DS but he still hasn't caught it Sad

Jimjambells · 08/12/2004 12:00

Chances are if you expose at 8 months she won't get it anyway- she'll still have antibodies from you. However she may get a nice cpox booster. DS1 had cpox when ds2 was 8 months, ds2 didn't get it- but has been exposed on a further 3 occasions (at least) and hasn't got it (he's almost 3 now). I suspect he's just had a series of boosters and may well escape the disease totally (same thing happened to me- never had it but have the antibodies).

TetleyHallsWithBoughsOfHolly · 08/12/2004 12:00

Ive been told that if kids have chickenpox before they're 12 months old then it doesn't guarantee immunity for the rest of their lives. They need to be above 12 months old for this to happen.

So perhaps wait a bit....

MaryChristmas · 08/12/2004 12:01

I don't think purpose is the right word.
We don't want to see our offspring suffer , but then it is a illness that will no doubt affect one or another at some time, sooner rather than much later, I personally think.

MaryChristmas · 08/12/2004 12:02

crossed posts 12 months onwards perhaps then. Smile

Uwila · 08/12/2004 12:04

I plan to intentionally expose my children to chicken pox. When dd was about 8 months it was going round our antenatal group babies. Some people did go out and get exposed. I avoided it like the plague because I knew that I planned to have another child, and that I want them both to get chicken pox at the same time so that I could go through it just once. Next D? is due end of May. So, about the time he/she is approaching a year old, I think I'll try and expose them both (if this opportunity presents itself). I've never been vaccinated, but had chicken pox when I was 8 yrs old. It wasn't too bad. And I definitely think that natural immunity is better/safer than foreign antibodies injected by the NHS.

TumbleflumpDancingBum · 08/12/2004 12:04

Chickenpox and shingles are caused by the Herpes Zoster virus. It is also called the varicella-zoster virus (varicella is the medical name for chickenpox).

Chickenpox is a mild disease affecting most children. It is most common in the winter and spring and nearly all cases occur in epidemics, once every three years or so. It is most common between the ages of two and eight.

The person is infectious from about two days before the rash appears until approximately five days after. It takes 11-20 days to develop symptoms after being in contact with the virus (the 'incubation period').

It is spread by direct contact with broken chickenpox blisters or by inhaling infected airborne droplets.

The rash takes the form of blisters, which burst and then scab over. Traditionally it was thought that the risk of passing on the infection was still there until the last blister had burst and scabbed. However, it is now recommend that children need only be excluded from school for just 5 days, as transmission has not been reported beyond day five of the rash.

After a chickenpox infection, the viruses remain dormant in the nervous system and are kept in check by the immune system. At any time later in life, but usually in adulthood, the viruses can be reactivated, causing shingles.

If a woman is exposed to chickenpox or shingles when pregnant, there is no problem if she has already had chickenpox as a child as she is immune. 85% of women have antibodies to the chickenpox virus and therefore their baby is not at risk of chickenpox even if the mother develops shingles during pregnancy.

If the woman has not had chickenpox or is unsure if she has, she should see her doctor to arrange a test for antibodies as soon as possible. If this shows she has not had chickenpox and has no antibodies, then chickenpox antibodies can be given to stop the disease developing. This is best given within 4 days (but is probably of use within 10 days) of coming into contact with the virus.

sandyballs · 08/12/2004 12:08

No - I wouldn't deliberately expose your children to it. My dd had it when she was 2.5 and was very very poorly - could not see any skin without infected spots on, she hardly moved for five days. I had no idea chicken pox could be so nasty and therefore wouldn't deliberately inflict it on anybody.

Uwila · 08/12/2004 12:10

Wow, who needs an encyclopaedia when there's TumbleFlumpDancingBum!

MaryChristmas · 08/12/2004 12:11

I can see a new vaccine called MMRCP in the pipeline?

Uwila · 08/12/2004 14:20

Funny MaryChristmas. Speaking of which I got a letter through from the NHS yester which said "be wise. Immunise." inviting DD to her MMR. This irritated me because before they would let me register her at the surgery they insisted on haveing her vaccination dates. She has had two of the three vaccinations... but they were going to give them to her again?!?!?!? Bloody morons. Think it's time they start tracking the single jabs!

Ok sorry, so off the topic. Hijack/rant over.

TinselTamum · 08/12/2004 14:40

Well, I've said this on here before but I'll mention it again. My dd got CP at 26 months and was hospitalised with encephalitis. Mercifully, she recovered, and I'm well aware that it is rare, but God knows it was horrific and terrifying enough without having to deal with the guilt I'd have felt if I'd exposed her knowingly. So no, for what it's worth, I wouldn't, and definitely not at 8 months.

OnZephyrstdayofXmas · 08/12/2004 14:47

I would rather that my two got chicken pox while they are little so it is milder. I don't think i'd go out of way to expose them to it but if it was going around i certainly wouldnt keep them away from it. I got chicken pox when I was 16 and I thought it was going to kill me!!! It was dreadful. I had them down my throat and internally as well. Dp didnt get them till he was 35 - the year before i met him so i wasnt' around but i've seen the pics and he looked dreadful!!!

midnightmass · 08/12/2004 14:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ChristmasBOOZA · 08/12/2004 14:59

Is it really true that babies can get it again? I can't believe my poor DD went through all that and still won't have immunity.

MaryChristmas · 08/12/2004 15:02

I had it when I was seven as it was doing the rounds as it does.
I could get shingles later on in life.

Barbaloot · 08/12/2004 22:07

I wouldn't deliberately expose an under 1 to chickenpox as there is a higher chance of more serious illness, especially where the mother hasn't had it herself and so no immunity has been conferred.
ChristmasBOOZER, A report in 'Pediatrics' investigating repeat cases of chickenpox indicates "Those with double infections tended to develop the disease for the first time at a relatively young age, and the condition took on a relatively mild form". Sounds to me like your dd had a strong first dose and so should have a good immunity!

Tinker · 08/12/2004 23:44

I wouldn't. Daughter pretty badly scarred from it on her face Sad

tinseltortoiseshell · 08/12/2004 23:51

I've heard about them not being immune if under a year too.

Swipe left for the next trending thread