or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Women's Health  › Would you bring your child to a measles party?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Would you bring your child to a measles party? - Page 2

Poll Results: Would you bring your child to a measles party?

 
  • 20% (26)
    Yes
  • 56% (73)
    No way
  • 23% (31)
    Maybe - I'm not sure
130 Total Votes  
post #21 of 51
If my DS was older (hes just 2 now) and I wasn't preggo (nor had a young child) at home? Yes, probably. That is to say, if all my kiddos were over say 3 and under, say, 10-12, almost certainly. If one or two were over/under? IDK, I'd certainly think long and hard on it! And even now I think I'd be pretty tempted to send him to a chickenpox party!!
post #22 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimberlyD0 View Post
Indeed.

But then why decide not to vaccinate because its to risky because there is a slim chance of a vaccine reaction, but then intentionally expose them when its pretty much garenteed they will then be sick? The is no logic to that.

Not saying you should vaccinate, but that if you choose not to vaccinate to keep your child safe, it would only make sence to keep them safe again by not intentionally exposing them to something that will make them sick.

Totally different then a child coming into contact with it at some point and getting these things. Thats how nature intended it.
There is a huge difference between severe vaccine reactions and the long-term damage that I suspect the immune system suffers from vaccines vs. the contraction of a mild childhood illness like chicken pox or measles. They aren't the same thing at all when it comes to "keeping a child safe."
post #23 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimberlyD0 View Post
Indeed.

But then why decide not to vaccinate because its to risky because there is a slim chance of a vaccine reaction, but then intentionally expose them when its pretty much garenteed they will then be sick? The is no logic to that.

Not saying you should vaccinate, but that if you choose not to vaccinate to keep your child safe, it would only make sence to keep them safe again by not intentionally exposing them to something that will make them sick.

Totally different then a child coming into contact with it at some point and getting these things. Thats how nature intended it.
The vaccine reactions many parents worry about are not simple disease symptoms...the concern is neurological or immunological damage which is not easily treated or reversed.

The CDC admits that immunity gained from a vaccine is not as strong and lasting as when a child obtains natural immunity from a disease. Many parents feel that it is better in the long run (for their child's immune system and future health) to go ahead and get some of the diseases such as chicken pox and measles.
post #24 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sijae View Post
There is a huge difference between severe vaccine reactions and the long-term damage that I suspect the immune system suffers from vaccines vs. the contraction of a mild childhood illness like chicken pox or measles. They aren't the same thing at all when it comes to "keeping a child safe."
But it is the same thing, at least for measles, because as much as people think that measles is no big deal, its like a cold, its not. It can, and does cause long term damage, including blindness and deafness and even death. Common? no but it does and has happend. I am not saying vaccinations are right for everyone either, I relise that serious side effects can and do happen, but like with the measles themself, they are not common, nore are they "normal" most children who get the vaccinations will have no long term damage, same as the illnesses themselve.

If I can keep my kids safe from both then I feel I should.

Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post
The vaccine reactions many parents worry about are not simple disease symptoms...the concern is neurological or immunological damage which is not easily treated or reversed.

The CDC admits that immunity gained from a vaccine is not as strong and lasting as when a child obtains natural immunity from a disease. Many parents feel that it is better in the long run (for their child's immune system and future health) to go ahead and get some of the diseases such as chicken pox and measles.
I'm not saying that the vaccines are the answer. Not at all.

What I am saying is people will go out their way to avoid vaccines that might cause a reaction, but they don't concider that there could be reactions to the illnesses themselves. It just doesn't make sence.

As I said why no protect them from both? If they get exposed and get it naturally thats one thing, but it feels very wrong to me to perposly make your child sick. After all you would never do this with anything else, why should your child have to suffer if they don't have to.
post #25 of 51
Sine this is about illness exposure rather than vaccines I'm moving to H&H...
post #26 of 51
No, although we did expose dd to cp (10 times, and she still didn't get it). Measles scares me more. I still haven't gotten her vaxed for it yet, but will when she's older.
post #27 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimberlyD0 View Post
But it is the same thing, at least for measles, because as much as people think that measles is no big deal, its like a cold, its not. It can, and does cause long term damage, including blindness and deafness and even death. Common? no but it does and has happend. I am not saying vaccinations are right for everyone either, I relise that serious side effects can and do happen, but like with the measles themself, they are not common, nore are they "normal" most children who get the vaccinations will have no long term damage, same as the illnesses themselve.

If I can keep my kids safe from both then I feel I should.



I'm not saying that the vaccines are the answer. Not at all.

What I am saying is people will go out their way to avoid vaccines that might cause a reaction, but they don't concider that there could be reactions to the illnesses themselves. It just doesn't make sence.

As I said why no protect them from both? If they get exposed and get it naturally thats one thing, but it feels very wrong to me to perposly make your child sick. After all you would never do this with anything else, why should your child have to suffer if they don't have to.


Well, there's some benefits to their getting the diseases. The main one, for me, is the drastically decreased chance of catching the disease in adulthood (and possibly when pregnant) when the disease can do a lot more damage.

Pox and measles parties are not some new, trendy idea. Before there were vaccines for these illnesses, parties were not uncommon.
post #28 of 51
My mom had mumps and my uncle had measles as children before there was a vaccine. My uncle had pretty significant hearing loss after. The MMR vaccine concerns me which is why DD has not gotten it, but so does the actual disease which is why I wouldn't purposely expose my child to it.
post #29 of 51
Yes, I would. I read recently that there is a correlation between natural immunity to measles and lower rates of allergies. Since DH and I both suffer severely from allergies, IMO it is worth it to expose them to the disease and gain natural immunity, and all the risks that go with it, rather than to get the immunization.

That said, DD1 has gotten the MMR vax. So for her this question is moot. DD2 has not and will not until she is older (around 10 maybe, if she is not naturally immune). I was afraid of measles until recently when I read more about the disease. Now I'm not afraid of it anymore. I'd so much rather my kids have natural immunity than chemical immunity.
post #30 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by lacysmommy View Post
Yes, I would. I read recently that there is a correlation between natural immunity to measles and lower rates of allergies.
Yep.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ract/123/3/771
post #31 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimberlyD0 View Post
But it is the same thing, at least for measles, because as much as people think that measles is no big deal, its like a cold, its not. It can, and does cause long term damage, including blindness and deafness and even death. Common? no but it does and has happend. I am not saying vaccinations are right for everyone either, I relise that serious side effects can and do happen, but like with the measles themself, they are not common, nore are they "normal" most children who get the vaccinations will have no long term damage, same as the illnesses themselve.
Some people are not so sure that the reactions are that uncommon - others are wondering if they have even defined what the problems could be. There is no consensus on this yet.
With regard to the measles themselves - while a child who is sick with measles can develop serious complications this is *very* unusual in a well nourished, otherwise healthy child. I remember from previous posts of yours that you had family members who were seriously affected by measles. I also remember from that post that they were leaving behind very difficult lives with conditions far from optimal to good health. (including vaccines, which I understand you to belief to be lifesaving).
I have had measles and I know it is more than a cold - but 22 years later I seem to doing ok. And I passed on immunity to my son via the placenta that would protect him while he was an infant.

Quote:
If I can keep my kids safe from both then I feel I should.
This of course is your responsibility as a parent. To make the best decision for your family.
Quote:
What I am saying is people will go out their way to avoid vaccines that might cause a reaction, but they don't concider that there could be reactions to the illnesses themselves. It just doesn't make sence.
The use of the words 'don't consider' is perhaps not entirely accurate when describing the choices parents make. Not all parents - but many parents who choose not to vaccinate know full well what the options are and are making informed choices with information from a variety of sources.
I agree it would not make sense if you are wanting to avoid illness altogeter.

Quote:
But then why decide not to vaccinate because its to risky because there is a slim chance of a vaccine reaction, but then intentionally expose them when its pretty much garenteed they will then be sick? The is no logic to that.
I want my child to have measles.
Not because I want him to suffer.
Because I am not scared of the disease.
Because I see more benefits to the disease than the vaccine for *my* child.
I am not trying to avoid diseases like measles, mumps, chickenpox etc. If anything I understand having these diseases in childhood to be the safest option out of all the options (including vaccination) that are available to my healthy well nourished child.

Of course many people would not agree with this and might even splurt their morning coffee reading it
post #32 of 51
My mother deliberately exposed me and a sibling to measles when we were 1 year and 2 years old so that we would get it and develop natural immunity to it. And sure enough we both got measles. I wasn't the worse for it so if I expose DD to a measles party she would be getting measles at an even older age than I was when I contracted measles. That rambling answer was to say "yes".
post #33 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimberlyD0 View Post
But it is the same thing, at least for measles, because as much as people think that measles is no big deal, its like a cold, its not. It can, and does cause long term damage, including blindness and deafness and even death. Common? no but it does and has happend.

What I am saying is people will go out their way to avoid vaccines that might cause a reaction, but they don't concider that there could be reactions to the illnesses themselves.
Please don't lump us in with the Private Practice mom. Most (if not all) of us are aware of the potential for complications, as well as how to reduce the incidence of complications. And a few of us dinosaurs have even had measles ourselves.
post #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proverbs31 View Post
Please don't lump us in with the Private Practice mom. Most (if not all) of us are aware of the potential for complications, as well as how to reduce the incidence of complications. And a few of us dinosaurs have even had measles ourselves.

Private Practice mom??


Well as I said. Its not that I think the vaccine is the answer, I just don't feel right perposly makeing my child sick. It just doesn't feel right.

I wasn't inteding to put down moms who do this, so I appologise if I did, I simply was trying to explain why I feel how I do.
post #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalisis View Post
No. If they contract it through whatever normal course of every day life, ok. I'm not going to go out of my way to get them infected with measles though (nor would I with any other disease - ie chicken pox).

Just my .02 and no need to flame me, it's my kid who wouldn't be contracting measles from the party, not yours.
I agree with you. I never got Chicken Pox, but I was exposed to it several times. My Mom didn't go out and deliberatly expose me.
post #36 of 51
I would never, ever, ever deliberately expose my children to ANY illness. I could never live with myself, watching them get sick (and potentially really sick, with complications), and knowing I made it happen. It goes totally against everything I try to do as a mother---because a large part of mothering them is trying to preserve them from harm, whether the harm is temporary suffering or long-term damage. Suffering is suffering.

NO WAY. And we also do not vax.
post #37 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by freestyler View Post
I would never, ever, ever deliberately expose my children to ANY illness. I could never live with myself, watching them get sick (and potentially really sick, with complications), and knowing I made it happen. It goes totally against everything I try to do as a mother---because a large part of mothering them is trying to preserve them from harm, whether the harm is temporary suffering or long-term damage. Suffering is suffering.

NO WAY. And we also do not vax.
What about preventing long-term damage (maybe even in future generations) through a short-term sickness? I think the "protect from harm" edict is actually a little more complex. Maybe I'm more aware of it because I've had to make some really hard decisions for my kid as a *part* of my protective mothering, but I think it's the same for everyone, actually. Especially when it comes to the complex issue of childhood diseases. If a child who isn't vaxed and doesn't get childhood diseases then ends up getting the disease while pregnant years later and endangering the new baby's development, that seems much more serious to me than a short-term illness when she was a child.

I'm just saying that it's more complex than "protection vs. non-protection" on the part of the parent.

The issue of wanting to protect our children from harm is universal; all of us want that. How to do it is not always straightforward, and that is as much a part of parenting as anything else. Those of us who are making different decisions from you are not less protective, just thinking about protection in a different way. It doesn't make it any easier, taking a risk on behalf of your child. I've done it more times than I can count because of my son's medical situation, and do it sometimes daily in serious medical and psychological ways, and it still sends shivers down my spine to be responsible for the unknown in that way. But that's the reality of parenting -- for all parents -- and it requires tenderness with self and flexibility more than anything else. In your case, if you choose the protection of not exposing your children now, you could be "responsible" for not protecting your grandchildren and adult children in a few years. In my case, if I expose my son to the chickenpox now in hopes of avoiding future more serious illness, I run the risk of responsibility for something serious happening now. It's a trade-off; there is no right or wrong here. Wouldn't it be easier if there was?

I think the trick is not creating rules, but creating an ethos of parenting that encourages informed decision-making and emotional support for the plentiful gray areas that exist.
post #38 of 51
Nah, the risks of contracting measles is so small, that I wouldn't choose to introduce it into our life.

The risk of death is due to a complication secondary to measles, usually in children under age 15 months. Children are not given an initial MMR until age 12-15 months anyway. It doesn't work earlier, incompletely immunizes, therefore multiple doses given. Measles itself is not deadly.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv...6.section.1531
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Scand.../Scandal33.htm

The risk of death, secondary to measles is 1-3 people per 1000 CASES of measles. With fewer than 100 cases in the US population, most over the age of 15 months, the risk of death is infinitesimal. http://aapredbook.aappublications.or...ct/2006/1/3.75
http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/m/measles/stats.htm

The possibility that anyone in the US could even acquire measles is 0.00000033%. Basically, 1 CASE per 3 million people!


Back when we were evaluating vaccination, we did these calculations for each disease and vaccination.

We don't vaccinate based upon the media fear-mongering. Do the math. Trust your body. But, we don't go looking for trouble, as they say, lol.


Pat
post #39 of 51
mbravebird---yes, you are right, and I have thought out all those issues. I have thought them out at length. Your response is also what I agree with....but for me, the answer (at least right now) is that I would not intentionally expose them. Now if they contract CP accidentally, well, so it goes. Not much I can do about that.

I'm about to get my titers drawn to see if I even had CP as a kid. I'm hoping I did so that if my kids DO get exposed, I don't get it! Now, I suppose that is very paradoxical of me, it really is. But anyway, that's all I feel comfortable doing at the moment.

Does anyone know if kids can be naturally immune to CP, because of the mother's immunity being passed on in the breastmilk? I mean, even if your child never had the CP, can they be immune? I've always wondered about this. Because our kids came into contact, close and extended contact, with a kid with ACTIVE CP, and I didn't know it until too late. None of them ever developed chicken pox from that exposure. At least not visibly, anyway, if it is even possible to have an invisible case of CP. Which was good, because I was in the first trimester of pregnancy at the time, and like I said, I don't know if I've had CP. I was also glad they didn't get it because they just would have felt lousy!

I live in mortal fear of CP, I'll admit it. The name alone just makes my stomach turn.

Edited to add: oops, I just remembered this thread is about measles, not CP. Duh.
post #40 of 51
i voted maybe. if my children were old enough for them to get a "good case" and gain true immunity, assuming i actually knew anyone whose children had measles and were willing to "share the love"...i would rather my kiddos had it as as children rather than the possibility of getting it as an adult. for the time being i don't really worry about it because i don't know anyone locally (yet?!) who shares the same beliefs as i do about health matters. i'm quite the hippy dippy health nut here in OKC.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Women's Health
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Women's Health  › Would you bring your child to a measles party?