My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

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

General health

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate?

96 replies

hopey · 25/07/2002 09:40

Is anyone out there as worried as me about the reports that fewer parents are having their children vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella?
I can understand the feelings about the mmr triple jab, and single jabs are becoming harder to find, but it concerns me that more and more parents aren't having their kids vaccinated at all, taking the view that "they'll be surrounded by kids that are vaccinated, so they shouldn't catch anything anyway". If more and more people start to take that view, then we'll have an epidemic on our hands.
I'm not keen on the thought of my dd having the triple jab. I don't think I could forgive myself if anything did happen to her, even though they tell us its highly unlikely. It looks as though it will be single jabs for her (if I can get them). I couldn't not have her vaccinated at all especially after seeing a baby on t.v. with measles. She was really poorly in intensive care. It broke my heart to see.
Well, thats my little rant for the day.

OP posts:
Report
AimeesMum · 25/07/2002 10:04

I had dd vaccinated with the triple jab. I did not even consider not having her vaccinated, as the outcome of not having the vaccination I feel can be much worse if they catch measle mumps or rubella. I had read a book produced by the NHS that was free with Mother & Baby (health visitors should have the video version, I know mine has). I don't really believe that the goverment would want a nation full of children with problems caused by the triple vaccination..obvioulsy in the long run costing the NHS more money?! I believe it is a safe vaccination.
A friend of mine's baby has recently had measles..he is 9 months old! I know that he hasn't been vaccinated due to children having the triple jab at 12 months+ but surely this must show you how there is a rise in children having one of the three infections! Don't the single jabs have to be given a year apart..so the first at 1, second at 2, third at 3..I feel this is too long apart, as you run the risk of your child catching the infections, especially if they are given in the same order to each child. I wouldn't want to sign to my deaf child, why she had contracted one of the infections due to me not getting her properly vaccinated.

Report
Azzie · 25/07/2002 10:14

Both of mine had the triple jab, and if I was doing it again now I would make the same decision. I feel very strongly about this (so strongly that I usually avoid entering discussions about it). Too many of us have forgotten that measles can kill - we've got used to not having it around. Also, the gaps between the single jabs give far more scope for epidemics to get started. Plus, there will be parents who (for example) don't bother to get their sons jabbed against rubella because they're boys so don't need it, potentially putting future unborn babies at risk because rubella is more likely to be around.

Report
ks · 25/07/2002 10:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Marina · 25/07/2002 10:24

I don't agree with the way the concerns of some of the late-onset autism families have been handled by the DoH, nor do I think they have handled dealing with other parents worried about MMR issues at all well, but I agree Batey - I think children should be immunised against all three of these illnesses - for their own safety and that of others they mix with. Surely the gaping hole in the logic of these parents is obvious to them? It won't take long for their children to be surrounded by non-immunised children if everyone takes their view.
I still think single jabs should be available to all who want them - I particularly resent the implication that as a parent I will be too feckless to come back for the other two once measles has been done - and I don't mind paying for them as we have a local clinic that does the single jabs. If that has run out of stocks by the time no 2 is old enough to qualify, then we will go to France.

Report
Bozza · 25/07/2002 10:35

The thing that gets to me is that by not having kids vaccinated its the most vulnerable kids that are put at risk (ie those with a condition which means they can't be vaccinated and little babies). This was a concern of mine when DS started nursery at 15 weeks. However he is now part of the vaccinated herd!

I remember at school when all the class except one girl went off to have the TB jab (another nasty that is making a come back). She said "there's no point I've never caught anything" and I remember thinking "of course you haven't because we've all had the injections and seen to that".

Report
pupuce · 25/07/2002 10:38

I don't want to start this heated debate again but wanted to answer a very specific point hopey made.
I know several (like-minded) parents who choose to have their children NOT vaccinated - not in the hope that their children won't catch it because everyone else is vaccinated but because they do not believe immunization is a good therapy for the body of a small child (and this sin't MMR specific BTW). They have a different perspective on health matters.

Report
aloha · 25/07/2002 10:54

I wish I could trust the government on this - but I don't. I remember BSE too well, and the times we were told there was definitely nothing wrong with beef and it was safe for babies to eat. Now we find BSE is much more easily transmitted to children than to adults via contaminated meat. I am worried about the triple jab. Even though I am sure reactions are very rare, it is the devastating nature of those reactions that worries me - the kind of autism these children seem to suffer is basically the death of your child and the replacement of them by someone quite different. I read Nick Hornby's feature in the Observer and found it very convincing. I know my ds won't die of measles (it is unheard of except in cases where the child is already very ill) and I also I should be sacrificing my child for the good of the herd, but I'm just not going to. I would feel like killing myself if he became austistic after getting the jabs - I just couldn't live with myself. He'll get single jabs when he's older but not the MMR. And the fact that the government won't commission new research specifically into the links between MMR and Autism doesn't give me any confidence at all. The idea of adding chickenpox to the MMR to make it a quadruple vaccine horrifies me too. I wonder what we are doing to our children's immune systems with our Dettox and our vaccinations. I do wonder if there is a link between them and the rise of asthma, allergies etc. It seems the more stressed a child's immune system is, the less likely they are to get them. And more children are dying from asthma and allergies, so I'm not totally sure we've got the balance right.

Report
susanmt · 25/07/2002 11:44

I dont usually get into arguments about this either, as I have also had my children have all vaccinations to date (ds has not had mmr yet as too young but he will).
I have actually read the research, not the media version of things, and the research is AWFUL. YI think the blame for children not being vaccinated lies with the media, who have blown this up out of all proportion.
What REALLY irritates me is the assumption in some circles that you have been irresponsible to HAVE your child vaccinated - people throwing up their hands in horror at you 'inflicting' vaccinations on your child. I was in an online attachment parenting community and I had to leave it because of some of the comments I got about vaccinating, as if I had let the side down somehow.
So hopey, I am as worried as you but I will go for the triple jab. My only experience of Autism is in my younger brother who also has bowel problems - and he never had measles vaccination as I had a fit with mine. For every anecdote there is a counter anecdote!

Report
Tissy · 25/07/2002 11:53

aloha-

sorry, but it is not unheard of for healthy children to die of measles. It can happen. Yes it is more likely to be fatal in frail individuals, but healthy children have still died, in this country, of a disease which for most children is mild. Even if your child doesn't die, measles encephalitis can be sevely disabling, much worse than any kind of autism/ bowel disease. Yes, I would feel awful if my child got autism after the jabs, but I would feel worse if my child became brain damaged from catching measles, or if someone else's child caught measles from mine and suffered the same result. The incidence of brain damage from measles in this country, when we didn't have a vaccine, was higher than the current incidence of this form of autism. (No-one seems to be suggesting that any other form of autism is related to MMR).

Rant over

Report
Loobie · 25/07/2002 11:54

both my ds have had the mmr injections but they got them before the media got on the case, my youngest is now 4 and almost due his booster,my eldest is autistic but not due the injection(IMO),but i am now left facing the scary decision of whether to give no.2 his booster, i have decided when the time comes to ask for a blood test to check his immunity as aparently they are only given the booster because up to 9% of kids dont take up full immunity the first time round,so thereofre if he has adequate immunity he will not be having his booster as the thought of him being worse than his brother is too scary to even contemplate.
incidentally even though i dont think no.1 ds autisim was connected to the injection i know closely of two people whos kids 100%changed overnight from the having the injection,they lost speech never to gain it again,they went backward in development and many other things and have now been diagnosed as being autistic,so i really do think there is something going on but the question is what exactly?

Report
Tissy · 25/07/2002 11:57

PS

I should add that most GPs these days have never seen a case of measles, so I would imagine that diagnosis will be delayed in those kids that get measles in the next few years.

Report
aloha · 25/07/2002 12:04

As far as I know, and I have looked into it, no child has died who wasn't already badly immune-compromised or severely undernourished in any reasonably recent outbreak. Do you know of any specific cases involving otherwise healthy children? I'm not saying there isn't a good argument that vaccinations prevent outbreaks but I just feel I can't take the risk with my son. He will be immunised against measles but not via the MMR and not so young. Yes, it's selfish (on his behalf) but aren't we all a bit selfish when it comes to our kids. For example, I won't send my son to the local primary with its appalling reputation (actually the one Damilola Taylor went to!). The school is probably crying out for more middle-class kids and parents, but I'm not sacrificing him to a hell-hole where kids are murdered just to make a minute change in the social mix.

Report
aloha · 25/07/2002 12:06

I was interested in Looby's post. Another friend of mine swears she has witnessed the same regression in other children she knows. It frightens the hell out of me.

Report
Enid · 25/07/2002 12:08

For what its worth, dd had hers done and was a bit poorly afterwards but recovered quickly.

I'll never forget taking her in and sitting, white-faced, in the waiting room, surrounded by legions of equally terrified looking parents. If it becomes clear that there is definitely NO link between MMR and autism/bowel problems I don't think I'll ever forgive the media/Dr Andrew what-ever-his names is for putting parents through that uneccessary fear.
The lovely nurse that was doing the injections put her arm round me and whispered 'Don't worry love, you are doing the best thing for your daughter'. It was very comforting

Report
aloha · 25/07/2002 12:19

I've just re-read my post and I do sound a bit aggressive. I think the risk is very small and I don't think it is bad parenting to vaccinate, far from it. But particularly for a boy (boys are much more likely to be autistic) I think it is one I just can't take. I just couldn't give him the MMR, I'm just far too scared.

Report
WideWebWitch · 25/07/2002 12:28

Well I know from past threads on this that it could get heated here My view is (and I don't expect anyone to share this):

  • Andrew Wakefields' research was probably flawed.
  • Media coverage has blown this up BUT
  • MMR has only been around for 12 (?) years. Therefore the long term effects i.e crohns in later life etc (seem to remember that a study showed that if measles and mumps were naturally caught close together then the incidence of crohns increases, but I could be wrong) are yet to be seen.
  • incidences of autism are rising but this could be because of improved diagnosis. I'm not convinced there's a causal link between this and MMR (but have not researched the subject, just my feeling).
  • Our generation were not vaccinated but our parents did want us to have immunity (measles parties anyone?!). I would be interested if anyone could post incidences of measles then and deaths from measles. Was it as awful as the govt would have us believe? (pre any vaccinations?)
  • Agree with pupuce about subjecting young undeveloped immune systems to vaccination in general.
  • Suspect that the main reason for giving all 3 together is a) cost and b) get them with all 3 while they're in the surgery, increase the uptake.

    Ds has not had MMR and will not.But I completely respect the right other parents to go ahead. However, I don't blithely assume that the herd immunity will protect my child: his own immune system will.

    I don't trust the government and, like aloha, remember BSE and the lies they told about that. If they really want to up the vaccinaton uptake they should allow parents to vaccinate separately rather than not at all. I suspect the reason they have not been behind this is that doing so would be (in their view) tantamount to an admission of a problem with MMR and they will not back down on this one. Let the debate rage on
Report
Bozza · 25/07/2002 12:37

Personal question WWW but how old are you? I was vaccinated against measles and I am 29. Would have thought that most people of "our generation" were. I was also vaccinated against rubella at puberty (11 I think). They had a scare re the whooping cough vaccine and my youngest sister was not vaccinated and ended up with several weeks off school with whooping cough (which also has other risks).

My opinions are that I am unconvinced by the Wakefield research. Also since the links are with measles virus in the gut I am not convinced of the safety of the single vaccine or actual measles over the triple vaccine. The single vaccine is a middle-class idea, I think. For most people it is a choice - MMR or nothing. Also find the media very irresponsible.

Report
bayleaf · 25/07/2002 13:27

Nobody seems to have pointed out the error made earlier in the thread - YOU DO NOT HAVE TO WAIT A YEAR BETWEEN JABS IF HAVING THEM SINGLY!!!
It is approx 6 weeks between Rubella and Measles - and about 3 months then till mumps. We hadn't even been called for the MMR when dd had rubella - so she ended up having the measles jab about a fortnight after her MMR date - hardly the BIG gap leaving loads of time for epidemics to start that people would have you believe!!!
We're still waiting to go back for mumps - but that's hardly as important as measles, indeed any immunity for mumps given at this age will be invalid by the time they are teenagers - which is when mumps is a problem !

Report
Enid · 25/07/2002 14:00

bayleaf, but haven't you considered the possibility of your child contracting mumps and passing it to someone else who happens to be a non-immune teenager?

Report
ks · 25/07/2002 14:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

aloha · 25/07/2002 14:31

I read that feature too, ks, and it made me feel sick. Yes, I understand that the BSE infective agent is much more likely to infect children than adults, though I don't understand the mechanism. This is why all the victims who died (and are still dying) were so young - teenagers and early 20s. They were infected as young children and that's how long it took to appear as a disease. It's terrifying, and I don't think I will ever trust a politician again (not that I trusted them much before, anyway).

Report
WideWebWitch · 25/07/2002 14:42

Bozza, I'm 35. Just looked it up and MMR (i.e triple vaccine as opposed to single measles etc) was introduced in 1988, so 14 years ago. I was a bit out there!

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

Lucy123 · 25/07/2002 14:52

www - I see what you mean about the MMR only having been used for 14 years. But (and many people neglect this) the three single vaccines have NEVER been used in young children as rubella was always given to adolescents (and I'm not sure about mumps. MMR is used all over the world now and still no full-scale, controlled study has found a problem.

Even if the risk is there (which I guess it may be), it's still tiny and I'd rather take that than the much higher risk of measles or something untested any day.

IMO BSE (and the foot and mouth fiasco come to that) was mishandled in part due to the ridiculous power of the NFU - I'm not sure we can simply refuse to trust the government any more because of it.

Report
aloha · 25/07/2002 14:55

But Lucy123, the politicians LIED to us, and knew they were lying. If they do that because of vested interests, how do we know they aren't doing it now - after all pharmaceutical companies are equally powerful.

Report
Lucy123 · 25/07/2002 15:23

but Aloha, that's the point - pharmeceuticals must be loving this scare as three jabs are more expensive than 1! Maybe I just need to feel I can trust some people sometimes!

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.