Radio 4's Today programme want your views on compulsory vaccinations

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello.

The Today programme are very keen to hear what Mumsnetters think about making childhood vaccinations compulsory.

Should children not be allowed to start school until they've had all their jabs - therefore protecting the rest of the school community - as some experts at the British Medical Association are proposing?

Or does the idea of compulsory childhood vaccinations make you blood boil?

It's not just MMR, poface, diphtheria, polio, tetanus and haemophilus influenzae claim thousands of lives in countries who cannot afford to vaccinate. Congenital varicalle syndrome, and the much worse counterpart congenital rubella, can both be lethal. Immunocompromised individuals can die from a cold, let alone any of these, which is why we need herd immunity. We need to do something about it.

I used to be pro vaccination. I was first in the queue for every new one that came out. DD1 didn't get her (single) measles because she was allergic to egg and the GP said no. When MMR came out GP again said no, so she didn't get that one. She had everything else going.

DS1, DS2 and DS3 had all their jabs.

At 9 months old, DS1 started losing weight. He wasn't obviously ill but wasn't right. Months and months of doctors appointments and hospital appointments didn't get to the bottom of it. Once he started to walk he was very clumsy and I can clearly remember my mum saying "there's something wrong with that baby". He was dx with dyspraxia at 5 as an aside, with the consultant saying there was something else but he'd no idea what. Looking back he went downhill after his third DPT jab (in the days when they used mercury).

DS2 has ADHD and associated gut problems. He caught mumps after having the MMR Non vaccinated DD1 didn't catch it. DS3 caught rubella at 11 months old. DD1 didn't get that either.

When DD2 came along we decided, with the full support of my very pro vax mother not to give her the MMR. She has had the single measles and will have the rubella when she is 12.

Any forced vaccination schedule would need a signed guarantee that damages would be paid and care given for life as a result of any problems. I can't see that being forthcoming.

Thank you very much, one and all.

Today haven't got back to us about exactly when/how they're going to air your views - but we will let you know as soon as we do.

Someone cleverer than me has probably made these points better but it is well known that you can still contract measles even after being vaccinated, and that immunisations when children are very young simply leave them vulnerable to contracting mumps (for example) when they are older and it would be more serious. I would be very unhappy to subject my two to what is effectively a gamble with their future immunity. I personally believe immunisations are driven more by finance than public health and that they can store up problems with the immune system that we are not yet aware of (for example diabetes).

Those people who feel vaccinations should be compulsory...
Should the sale of cigarettes and tobacco be outlawed in the UK? And smoking no longer allowed in public nor in private?

That seems like a far more sensible area to focus on.

notevenamousie, of course diptheria and hib and polio are deadly, I think very few children in this country are not vaccinated against those diseases though. I already said rubella should be offered to adolescent girls to protect against congenital rubella syndrome, many of whom lose immunity by the time they are of childbearing age despite being vaccinated as babies.

With regards to immunocompromised children, as you say, a cold could kill them. Presumably you advocate childhood vaccination against chickenpox and flu too? Where do you draw the line? If MMR is risky for a small group of children, to the point of damaging them for life, is that worth doing to protect a small number of immuno-compromised children? If think there is zero risk to MMR then of course that is ethical. But more research is required to prove that.

Did wonder at whether ds's nursery would require children to have mmr.

Not at all convinced that 'we know our kids best' vis the merits of vaccines. Agree that you ought to be able to agree with the dr/nurse if there is a medical reason why not to have vaccination and have that formally recorded.

as for immunity conferred by mother on babies - i was assured that ds1 could not have chicken pox at the age of 8 weeks as I had had chicken pox as a child. He did have cp. I have not had any of the other childhood diseases so def. wouldn't be passing on any immunity to ds's.

Not clear why the arguements about migrants/immigrants who might not have had vaccines. Seems sensible to me, if you were going to require children to be vaccinated, that school/nursery entry would be dependent on vaccine certs being up to date. Wherever they were administered...

May be you should read the following, before making vaccinations compulsory:

childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/secret-british-mmr-vaccine-files-fo rced-open-by-legal-action/#VaccineRiskOutweighs

Cut and paste the link and you get a message saying 'you are looking for something that isn't there'.

Conspiracy theorists are going to have field day with that!

Just been listening to prog on Radio 4 about the way that journalists cover science - and how damaging it's been to the debate on vaccines that journalists feel it necessary to always give a balanced view. Damaging because for every scientist/medic willing to come forward and debate the merits of vaccines, it was always Andrew Wakefield who gave the contrary position. Gives the impression that the position is genuinely in question in the scientific/medical community, when it was only ever one person who argued the case. (I paraphrase, but that was the gist.)

Don't suppose that will be of much interest to Today though - aah, the next piece we were going to do has already been covered in much greater detail on Leading Edge. Lets talk to Garry Richardson about Murray instead....