Do You Think Childhood Vaccinations Should Be Compulsory?

[ladybird11]

I vaccinate my kids, my choice And if they became friends with unvaccinated kids it wouldn't concern me.

However I would hate to have any choice related to bringing up my children taken away from me - that is just wrong.

Prof Paddy Philips (Chief Medical Officer - SA Health) was speaking on local radio about this on Thursday and made some very valid points about why people should be immunised. He made comment of how due to vaccinations 'Small Pox' only exists in science labs now due to vaccinations 'in the old days' which saw them phased out. Stated that if 3rd world countries had more access to immunisations then maybe not so many children and adults would die from diseases (which vaccinations would have prevented). I couldnt dispute on face value this information as it was stated he obtained it from the World Health Organisation.

However there were parts of the segment which caused me a giggle. A lady called in adamant she had the chicken pox vaccine, but caught it anyway. Professor firstly said maybe that vaccine wasn't given in the first instance, before conceding that 'it is very rare' to still catch a disease for which you've been vaccinated against.

As for Whooping cough - DH and I both had our updates late last year, and geez did that leave a painful lump for 2-3 days!! Ouch.

[Inanna]

As always Polly a great reply. I hear you & applaud you.

You are absolutely correct there are two sides & like you I can see both sides. I remain firmly with my feet in both camps & I can see the pain on non vax. I have also seen the pain of vax. From a mothers perspective and from a patients.

I am very warmed that you could so eloquently and kindly share your perspective. Anyone who is inflamed by your post - well it would shock me if anyone was.

[LimeSlice]

LIme, I respect you have your opinion but can you not see that this kind of statement is just as offensive as some of the provaccination debate statements
Where do you draw the line with arguments such as these?
Premature babies are saved these days by medical intervention- should they be left to die as is the natural order of things? Antibiotics save lives and treat infectious diseases that you speak of, should we give those away too. Such generalisations on either side of the debate are a slippery slope. And statements such as these are much easier to make in a country which has seen a dramatic drop in infectious diseases- you may say living conditions, I may say a combination of vaccines and improved living conditions...either way I find it incredibly offensive to the women the world over burying their babies for a lack of both that you would call infectious disease population control.
I defy you to tell me that if infectious diseases once again became epidemic in Australia and it was your babies and your friends and families being buried you would still hold this view.
I see vaccination as I see public eduation. A privelage. I would never force them on anyone or support them being compulsory as I can see your side, I can see that for some the risks involved may be unpalatable and to force something carrying a risk on someone is assault.
But PLEASE, respect that there are two sides to this debate
Modern Medicine is very particular about evidenece and modern governments do not fund expensive programs easily.
As far as your arguments about Indigenous populations, I trained in the NT and have a passion for Indigenous helath. I worked with the paediatrician who championed the cause of adding pneumococcaal to the schedule after switching off the life supoprt on another child with pneumococcal meningitis. No conspiracy there, just pure desire to stop preventible death. ANd there is no doubt that this particular vaccine reduced morbidity and mortality in Indigenous populations.
Infectious disease are not "white disease" either with a large burden in non caucasion world
This will be my last reply on this topic, I value what BB offers me in terms of support too much to risk going out in a blaze of controversy.
I respect peoples individual opinion, what troubles me is pushing a one sided argument about vaccination with patchy evidence to supoport without respect that there is another side. Before you say I don't respect your side I do... I have repeatedly admiteed it is a two sided argument, but feeling very beaten into submission by the geenral tone of these forums and disprespected. This, is why the pro vaccination side of the argument is either absent or inflammatory.
I don't geneally do inflammatory and i am now understanding where if may come from and many of you may see this post as inflammatory. I apologise.
I could come here daily with support and evidence for "my side" as, hand on my heart, i promise that it exists.
BUt I won't because I don't think this discussion will have a good outcome, so instead i will agree to disagree with the small request to please consider the balance of the argument. Please consider that just as you are disgusted by some pro vaccination statements that are ill thought out, some of the anti statements are equally inflammatory and disrespectful to people

Personally? I don't believe in the human race as it is now. Simple. That is where I draw the line.
I am on the fence over when to let babies go and how early is too early, I am on the fence about IVF and alterntive methods of concepton...All from the same starting point - we are overpopulated. There is a ntural reason why babies are miscarried, why some cannot conceive, why some are born blind or with club feet...and on and on and on.
We are overpopulated.

And there MUST be therefore birth control, death control or both. At the moment, the human race is intent on allowing and assisting everyone in the world to produce offspring, saving every child that is born, preventing everyone from dying and extending the life off all these people. It is simply physiologically unnatural and unhealthy to the ultimate survival of the species.

And no, I don't think that accepting that you will NEVER stop ALL disease or bacteria from existing, simply if for no other reason than it is copletely necessary to the function of all natural organisms.
It may offend people sensibilities because they want to help everyone and hate to see people suffer. So do I. It is paiful to see people who so desperately want children not be able to make them, carry them or birth them; it is devastating to see children dying and wasting; to see 30 year olds dying from cancer...the list is endless.

But none of that detracts from the broaders physiological argument that we CANNOT sustain life the way modern medicine wants too without destroying the race. There is not enough food or water on the planet now.

And seriously, if I read one more "well you wouldn't feel this way if it were your children dying, getting sick...." comment I will scream. I WOULD feel that way. I ACCEPT that people may catch diseases and die, I understand that even common illnesses seemingly harmless can cause death and it is heartbreaking. But it is the way it will be, so PLEASE don't presume that you can "defy" me to feel differently in such a a situation. I have lived with ravaging disease for the last 25 years in more than one form and I am at peace with the devastation it causes and know full well its implications.
Show me the respect of accepting the notion that I am not ignorant who has some grandiose notion of the species but I am a secret hypocrite praying my children don't get sick.

So the question I pose for those who believe in total illness irradication for the entire world forever is this: Once you do that, achieve that Utopian ideal of the disease-illness-free world, how do expect to control the population, when you will have removed one of 2 of the ways species population naturally moderate themselves?

[slyder]

In principle I get your overall argument even if I'm not sold on it (but I reckon it will be more inflammatory than anything I've said!). But what are you getting at re the blindess and club feet thing? Neither condition is terminal, but both can be managed, especially the latter. So are you saying that people with these conditions should be cast off on an ice floe, or left untreated or something?

[Inanna]

What is thsi about club feet???

[LimeSlice]

lol Not at all Slyder, simply examples of things hope don't happen to their kids in general. All natural occurances.

[Arcadia]

Lime I truly love your passion! I think you are unique though in having such a big picture perspective. Most people live in and among the minutiae that is day-to-day life...what's for dinner, how do we pay the bills, how do I protect myself and my family.

The western capitalist model of living is not about the health of the planet, but about the individual consumer and the health of the workforce...why else would workplaces push for flu vaccinations?

Most of us struggle to just meet the demands of our healthy kids, let alone living with the anxiety they might catch a preventable disease...and die! Death is an abberation in our society. It is not normalized, it is marginised and ignored as an elephant in the room, because we all want to be fitter, live longer, look prettier, be smarter, be successful, and not be marred by aging and death... Right? Right?

It's earth shattering to draw attention to the larger view. And I think people like you change the way the rest of us live....eventually.

[slyder]

I agree that it's a pretty progressive view, although generally unpalatable to those who are directly affected by the premise. I have often wondered about the potential detriment to the race of some assisted conception techniques, treatments of various conditions and so on. Although where I finally stand on that I'm not sure.

My interest in the club feet thing is because of my little groovers has bilateral talipes and has, and will need, quite a bit of medical treatment to repair it.

[LimeSlice]

Like I said Slyder, I could have said crossed eyes (like myself) or epilepsy (like my sister) club feet was just a natural and non-preventabel condition I picked out of my head. And certainly non of the argument was directed at casting anyone off anywhere.

[Inanna]

I too share some of your sentiments Limey (you must have been editing when I replied above!). I do agree with much of your view. I also agree with Slyder that it's probably going to cause more offense than anything that dear Slyd has said... But I know I struggled with the question about weather I would fight to keep Imogen alive at 27+5 weeks. I actually made some bargains with the devil... I also drew some lines in the sand. However, I very well would have crossed them had push come to shove. Because she was my child.

When she arrested at about 6 weeks after coming home (she was in hospital) I ran from the room & I just shouted to the Universe. Then I did something that was on auto pilot. I went back in and stood holding her feet & told her if it was her journey to stay I wanted her more than she could ever know. But if she had to leave then I would let her go. She came back. I think it was a lesson in detatchment for me. I actually watched her die before my eyes. Seeing your child in asystole is not something anyone wants. To watch her gag on intubation. To watch her small body limp and unresponsive. I actually am almost hyperventilating typing.

So - long winded. But I get the decisions we need to make. I also know that some of what you've said Limey is going to strike a chord of deep resentment in some. But I do hear you & understand that your perspective comes from a deeper & wider view omn humanity. One I do get.

When it came down to it. I wasn't going to not ventilate my 800 odd gram baby. She had fought this long & I had the medicine available to save her. I am not sure if I am a hypocrite, a fake or what. But it was different. I remember holding views that prems that couldn't breathe alone and cost so much to sustain perhaps it was God's way (Universe, Goddess, law of Nature - whatever). Now, I see we have the medicine. I see my miracle eating a freshly baked bikkie as I type & she's wondering why I blubber.

Far out I don't know the answer but I do get you... *going away to rethink my authenticity*

[PollyA]

Personally? I don't believe in the human race as it is now. Simple. That is where I draw the line.
I am on the fence over when to let babies go and how early is too early, I am on the fence about IVF and alterntive methods of concepton...All from the same starting point - we are overpopulated. There is a ntural reason why babies are miscarried, why some cannot conceive, why some are born blind or with club feet...and on and on and on.
We are overpopulated.

And there MUST be therefore birth control, death control or both. At the moment, the human race is intent on allowing and assisting everyone in the world to produce offspring, saving every child that is born, preventing everyone from dying and extending the life off all these people. It is simply physiologically unnatural and unhealthy to the ultimate survival of the species.

And no, I don't think that accepting that you will NEVER stop ALL disease or bacteria from existing, simply if for no other reason than it is copletely necessary to the function of all natural organisms.
It may offend people sensibilities because they want to help everyone and hate to see people suffer. So do I. It is paiful to see people who so desperately want children not be able to make them, carry them or birth them; it is devastating to see children dying and wasting; to see 30 year olds dying from cancer...the list is endless.

But none of that detracts from the broaders physiological argument that we CANNOT sustain life the way modern medicine wants too without destroying the race. There is not enough food or water on the planet now.

And seriously, if I read one more "well you wouldn't feel this way if it were your children dying, getting sick...." comment I will scream. I WOULD feel that way. I ACCEPT that people may catch diseases and die, I understand that even common illnesses seemingly harmless can cause death and it is heartbreaking. But it is the way it will be, so PLEASE don't presume that you can "defy" me to feel differently in such a a situation. I have lived with ravaging disease for the last 25 years in more than one form and I am at peace with the devastation it causes and know full well its implications.
Show me the respect of accepting the notion that I am not ignorant who has some grandiose notion of the species but I am a secret hypocrite praying my children don't get sick.

So the question I pose for those who believe in total illness irradication for the entire world forever is this: Once you do that, achieve that Utopian ideal of the disease-illness-free world, how do expect to control the population, when you will have removed one of 2 of the ways species population naturally moderate themselves?

Interestingly I share some of your philosophies but object to genneralisations from the position of privelage that living in Australia gives you
Would you consider vaccination if your children had 30% chance of dying before they turned 5?
how would you feel if they developed a vacccine against HIV which kills so many?

My view of this is not simply Western and capalist (another poster I know), the population control you speak of is not going to affect the western world but will devestate developing countries. This is why I find your statements are offensive.

War is historically a great form of population control and I find the use of that line of reasoning why War is a good idea abbhorent. Is that the second form of population control you allude to?

[Inanna]

Also a good point Polly. If I knew my child had a 30% chance of dying I am still not sure what Id do given my familial history. I also hold the reasoning that war is great population control abhorrent.

We are speaking from the relative comfort of our middle class Australian loungerooms....

[slyder]

We are speaking from the relative comfort of our middle class Australian loungerooms....

So true. Very true.

[Arcadia]

Edit: the conversation has moved on somewhat while I typed the below response. I don't agree with the idea of population control through diseases I do question our perception on what it means to be 'disease free'.

We could also add in cleft palate and downs syndrome and many other things pregnant women are 'scared' into ultrasounds over. I am not bagging ultrasounds, just the pathologising of anything that is not 100% perfect.

We have been sold an idea we can be perfect, disease free, syndrome free, cancer free etc as long as we take this pill, or have this screening test or follow the pack.

The whole idea that death, disease and genetic 'mistakes' is preventable is surely only one white, western modern viewpoint, and I really wonder if it makes us happier? Especially when we invest so much time in trying to 'fix' the rest of the world...and often places and races negatively affected by white imperialists or capitalists in the first place.

Now I am really on my soapbox. And for the record, I do vax!

[LimeSlice]

Thank you Inanna

I know much of what I have said (although I have stated it before a couple of times in varying degrees in relevant threads here) is going to either go over some, or infuriate others. It is not my intention. But there are other considerations than the immediate view of one life, or one family, one community that I believe are just as important in this sort of discussion.

I know I would try and save my children if I had the medicine, but I know there would be a point at which the trauma of those interventions in my mind would be trying to defeat the Law as it was, and I would have to allow myself to let go. And it would be devastating I am sure.

I don't WANT my child to get polio...measles...dipthiria...or any other one of these illnesses. I don't want her to suffer. Bu tI accept that we all walka path and that it may be hers to suffer an illness at some stage, and perhaps even die from it.
I wouldn't LET her die, but as I said, I am not prepared to work on the fear - based strategy of vaccination - especially when many of the things I am supposed to be vaccinating for are NOT deadly or even serious in MOST cases, although there are sometimes serious complications.
I am not prepared to do this when the chances of her catching said illnesses are less than the chances of her having side effects from the vaccine itself, as is the case for some of them - evenin countries where they are still much more prevelant than Australia.

But at the heart of any mandatory vaccination argument there has to be the core idea of curing disease by prevention. So my above question then becomes immediately relevant and an longterm consideration that must be addressed.

[PollyA]

Inanna, 'Thank you for introducing the human side that I am alluding to
Lime I want to share something with you so you know that I am considering what you have to say and not shooting from the hip.
I felt very strongly about extreme measures in extreme prematurity and had very strongg convictions about what I would do in that situation. Very much further complicated by being part of the medical profession
Then I heard the story of an Australian Doctor who's partner had a 24 (ish) weeker and their wishes were no heroics, alas in the moment the baby was ventilated and heroics ensued, The baby was almost certainly going to have severe disibilities. The Doctor and his wfie went to NICU, cuddled their baby and turned of fthe ventilator, he was subsequently charged with manslaughter of his own child. As if their suffering was not enough.

What was my response. I went to Samoa where heroics are not available but simple measures such as nasogastric tubes and basic ventliation are between 22-26 weeks for fear of being put in that situation.
But you know what? every day in Samoa I questioned my decision, My baby was kicking, communicating with me, it was mine.My philosophy didnt really change but I realised the complexities. I made a plan for what I would do if I wnet into labour which involved catching the next plane to NZ and calling an ambulance from teh tarmac on landing.
At the same time my friend had a 23 +5 weeker, he lived. He does have a degree of disability but I simply cannot look at his face and be as strong in my conviction
It is likey Iwill have future babies far from NICU's because of where I want to live and work and where i want my family to learn about the world. I still hold an idea that there is a natural order to things and we cannot intervene and save lives at all cost, BUt I see that there are many shades of grey in this arguement and find the extremes at either end offensive.

I also think we need to recognise the privelage of choice on issues such as these.
Interestingly Inanna it is cases like yours that make the medical profession even more determined to achieve herd immunity, to protect those who can't and shouldn't be vaccinated, generally due to a lower immune system which would also make infectious disease more severe

[Arcadia]

But at the heart of any mandatory vaccination argument there has to be the core idea of curing disease by prevention. So my above question then becomes immediately relevant and an longterm consideration that must be addressed.

I think this is the sticking point, because pro-vaxers (like myself) do belive that vaccinations are curing disease by prevention. I know you mean prevention by other means, but until people see vaccinations as anything other than miracle workers, the status quo will be to fund more vaccinations, rather than look at other prevention strategies (which is already happening imo, like with the HPV vaccination instead of informing people about safe sex, same with the efforts for an HIV vaccine, rather than looking at the social issues in countries like Africa which sees many people reject safe sex practices).

I know the side effects of vaccinations is a massive issue for most non-vaccinators, but until a study is performed comparing the risk of the disease with the risk of the side effects, medical advice will remain firmly in the camp of vaccinations.

I think side effects of drugs, ultrasounds, radiation therapy, shock therapy etc will be the next wave of studies in this country and other western nations as we turn our attention more and more towards what WE are doing to harm people and our planet.

EDIT: on the topic of premature babies, I also feel it needs to be a case by case situation and people should have a CHOICE whether they want to save their baby or not. I am appalled someone would be charged for turning off a ventilator. But then, Australia used to charge women whose babies died of SIDS. My aunt was questioned by police etc when her daughter died. Our penchant for litigation and 'justice' is just as problematic as the technologies that allow us to play god/dess.

[LimeSlice]

No war certainly isn't the second I refer to.
There are generally 2 ways in which species population is controlled: Food Abundance and Procreation rates. They are linked completely.
Generally when a population exhausts its food source or strains it, it will naturally cease to produce as many offspring until the food source can recover. When it does, population naturally increases again. It is a self preservation mechanism that the human species has managed through technology to so far circumvent, but this is getting more and more difficult to do as it is ultimately costing the planet itself.

As for would I feel the same if I lived in a Third World nation. Yes. If I had the same information I have now (the supply of which to such populations is another huge point of contention in vax discussions, but for argument sack we will assume I can access the ingredients and studies on said vaccinations).... Yes I would feel the same way, given my family history.

And until there was significant testing (long term, generational studies) on HIV vaccine, I wouldn't even bother to consider it at all, no.

The things I am speaking of WILL affect the western populations. They will affect the whole world, not just developing nations. Through economic affects, social affects, all will be affected. But yes, there will be massive devastation through places where technology we take fro granted is not available or provided.
Historically though, responsibility for this very problem is a White/Western/Imperialist hangover and by extension, developed nations responsibilty (hence 'our' humanitarian urge to save them - 'we' ruined them in the first place.)