Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Parenting

For free parenting resources please check out the Early Years Alliance's Family Corner.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

To BCG or not to BCG

28 replies

scgd · 03/11/2010 07:36

My Dh and I can't agree on this for our 20we ds just wondering who let their baby have it and if you didn't your reasons for not? TIA

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Original poster

scgd · 03/11/2010 07:37

I meant 10 week not 20

OP posts:

ScroobiousPip · 03/11/2010 07:54

Yes, I did. Tuberculosis is a killer disease and is enjoying a resurgence in the Western world. Unless a child has an immune problem, vaccination is in their best interests. Can't see any reason why parents wouldn't vaccinate.

MrsVincentPrice · 03/11/2010 08:29

Did for DD (inner London state primary, there has been a case at her school) but was not given the option for DS.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

Families General parenting

FlameGrilledMama · 03/11/2010 09:44

Yes both my DC have had this vaccination

MadameSin · 03/11/2010 16:07

My ds1 had it at 4 weeks due to the locality in which we lived. Ds2 was not offered it as we had moved away by the time he was born. I've never heard of a 'down side' to the BCG vaccination. My ds1 was fine after he had it. The best thing about it will be the fact they won't need to have it when they reach their teens. I was born immune as my mother had TB as a young women. If you live in a 'at risk' area, I wouldn't hesitate to get it for you dc.

allthatjazz · 03/11/2010 16:28

Excuse my niavity(sp?) I was under the impression you had your bcg in your teens? Im confused sorry! Does it depend where you like to whether you have it earlier?

daisyj · 03/11/2010 16:32

It's changed - used to be in your teens, now offered to all babies in high-risk areas. I did for our dd - south-east London - I'm a big believer in vaccination. Be warned, though, it took her scab about 8 months to turn into a small pink scar. Didn't bother her or get infected, but it did weep a little on and off and scab over, and repeat, for ages. This only goes on for a couple of months for some babies, though.

Mumcah · 03/11/2010 21:40

DS will be having it soon,he is 6 months.We are also in SE London which is high risk.Some say because of people spitting on the pavements,eww.

DandyDan · 04/11/2010 12:07

Absolutely. Piece in today's paper saying that TB is massively on the rise in the UK. Not all of my kids have had it offered (at the age of 12), and I would prefer it if they had. I would encourage you to take it.

MollieO · 04/11/2010 13:25

I refused. Ds was 7 weeks prem and born in a hospital in a high risk area. We didn't live in the area and ds wasn't going to be going there after he had been discharged. He had already been poked and prodded and injected so much in his weeks in hospital that I thought it as a jab too far. I consulted my GP (who is a paediatric registrar at that hospital) and he recommended that ds didn't have the jab. I was put under a lot of pressure by the midwives to let ds have it and practically told I was a bad mother for refusing.

kreecherlivesupstairs · 04/11/2010 13:27

My DD had it at birth. We were living in a very high risk area. I wouldn't hesitate to have her done with anything that will protect her. Poor thing, in addition to the normal UK vax, she has also had hep a, b, tyhoid, japanese encephalitis, rabies, chickenpox and some that I can't remember.

TheLadyIsNotForNapping · 04/11/2010 20:37

DD had hers at 8mo- we're in a high risk area. As well as your own child's health there's also a greater social consideration ie stopping the spread of diseases. Bear in mind that some children can't be vaccinated for health reasons (immune system problems usually). These children are especially vulnerable to diseases and can fight them off less easily. For me this is a good reason to help stop the spread of TB and other illnesses.

And of course, I'd be absolutely devasted if my daughter caught TB, it's as simple as that for me really.

valiumskeleton · 04/11/2010 20:38

I had no choice really. I moved from the UK to Ireland and they had to have the bcg to be allowed into the school......

valiumskeleton · 04/11/2010 20:39

ps, didn't seem to do either of them any harm, no fevers, no sickness, nothing that I can remember.

simpson · 04/11/2010 20:45

DS had his at birth.

DD had hers at 8mths. She was born in a different hospital which did not offer it when they were born.

Ds's came up quite badly and was there on & off for months. He has quite a large scar now but tbh it probably looks big because he arms are like twigs he is 5 now btw.

But Ds's reaction did not stop me getting it done for DD (now 2) though

simpson · 04/11/2010 20:45

his

wonderstuff · 04/11/2010 20:48

I don't understand why you would not have it tbh.

Flowergarden1 · 04/11/2010 23:49

I chose not to. It seemed a lot to be pumping into his little body, on top of all the other jabs. I understood that to be at risk you had to actually be living with someone with TB, or in very close contact, not just the kind of contact that you get at a bus stop or in shops. He didn't go to daycare and we're not in a high risk area.

5DollarShake · 05/11/2010 03:00

If you lived in what is deemed to be a high risk area, why wouldn't you...? Do you know anything about TB, and how it is transmitted? Genuine question - not being sarky.

DS had it had 3 months, and DD at birth. I have no interest in them catching TB.

firefrakkers · 05/11/2010 06:27

I had it at birth - high risk area - and am everlastingly grateful I didn't have to have it at 12...

cory · 05/11/2010 09:04

"I understood that to be at risk you had to actually be living with someone with TB, or in very close contact, not just the kind of contact that you get at a bus stop or in shops."

Not true. Dh's colleague contracted TB during a holiday in Russia, not from anyone she knew. It took her several years to get back to work and her health will probably never be the same. My FIL was disabled all his life after contracting TB in his teens- they don't know where it came from, but it wasn't from anyone he knew.

Teapot13 · 05/11/2010 12:41

I have been told that it generally does require prolonged contact.

We let DD get it -- we give her all the vaccines that are recommended. When we looked into it we learned that it is considered one of the safest vaccines, partly because it has been in use since the 50s.

The thing that convinced us most of all is that we were told it's offered to newborns because children under 1 year tend to get meningitis when they are infected with TB.

sleepwhenidie · 05/11/2010 12:51

Dd and ds2 were offered and have had it-Camden is high risk area, I believe because of large immigrant population. I was told it was very safe and also has no side effects after jab (except blister) because it isn't a live vaccine, unlike other routine jabs. I was also led to believe you could catch it with minimal contact, it is highly contagious.

I think many medical professionals believe it should be a routine rather than "optional", (which all vaccinations actually are of course) now because tb has become so prevalent.

MrsVincentPrice · 05/11/2010 17:08

Interesting thread - it might be inspiring me to go back and get DS(6) vaccinated - in an inner London school you never know where the new kid sharing your desk might have arrived from - it's only a matter of time before their school has another case and ghastly Multi-resistant strains are spreading fast.

cece · 05/11/2010 17:11

All three of mine had it within hours of birth. We live in a high immigration area, so they offer it as a routine jab before you leave the hospital.

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread