I've just watched my mum, who pushing 60, just came down with whooping cough. She wasn't allowed to be around babies under 6 months (for 100 days), so I am selfishly thankful that DD is older and we didn't have to stay away from her. So the diseases are coming back slowly. But I agree with freedom of choice, and I don't believe it should be compulsory, but I get angry when the reason given for not vaccinating is because the diseases aren't there anymore. They aren't there because of the immunisations! So that's my standing on the soap box moment!!!
It could also be argued that the reason why a lot of them aren't around anymore is because we wash our hands more often and have better levels of hygiene, access to health services and better health in general - just food for thought

Nae, I understand what you are saying, but if you feel that way, then you should have the option to use them if you want to kwim - the question isn't about the benefits of vaccination, but rather should people essentially be forced to do it if it were made compulsory. This could be asked about anything - should circumcision be made compulsory because of evidence suggesting it reduces the risk of cancer, or should it be made compulsory that we can't co-sleep because it will reduce the risk of smothering an infant or child - it sets us on a slippery slope towards the Government making all our parenting decisions for us. Heck they have already done it with homebirth haven't they? It is a basic right of being a parent that we are the ones to make the choices about what is the best thing for our children, not the right of the Government. It isn't really about what you would or wouldn't choose (even though I chose NO), but rather having the right to make the decision for yourself.