Do i need to avoid a freshly vaxed child?

[pishajane]

I'm supposed to see my sister on Thurs, and just found out that she is getting her 4yo ds vaxed on Wed. The schedule is polio, DPT and MMR.
I am 39 wks pregnant, and have 2 unvaxed dc - 3.5yo and 2yo. Should i avoid seeing them? And for how long? I would really hate for my kids to get anything just before i have my baby.
Thanks! Trish

[Marnica]

The MMR is a live virus vax. I would be more concerned about myself than the unvaxed kids. I would not be around a freshly vaxed child being that pregnant if you can help it. In your shoes I wouldn't go.

[an_domhan]

Originally Posted by pishajane

I'm supposed to see my sister on Thurs, and just found out that she is getting her 4yo ds vaxed on Wed. The schedule is polio, DPT and MMR.
I am 39 wks pregnant, and have 2 unvaxed dc - 3.5yo and 2yo. Should i avoid seeing them? And for how long? I would really hate for my kids to get anything just before i have my baby.
Thanks! Trish

I understand why some may think avoiding seems prudent. Take care not to show the same discrimination that provax people do with nonvaxxed kids/adults.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by an_domhan

I understand why some may think avoiding seems prudent. Take care not to show the same discrimination that provax people do with nonvaxxed kids/adults.

Sorry but I fail to see a comparison here. Provax people do want want their kids around unvaxed kids because they assume they are harboring disease (even when they are not ill). This is illogical. In this case, a pregnant woman would be exposed to a child who has had a live virus vaccine. She knows the child has had the vaccine and it it is a known phenomenon that live virus vaccines can shed. I would think erring on the side of safety here would not be discriminatory. It would be the same as if her sister called and said "geez, our 4 year old was exposed to measles or chicken pox or some other illness, he isn't showing signs of illness, but we thought we'd let you know."

[Emmeline II]

Originally Posted by Marnica

Sorry but I fail to see a comparison here. Provax people do want want their kids around unvaxed kids because they assume they are harboring disease (even when they are not ill). This is illogical. In this case, a pregnant woman would be exposed to a child who has had a live virus vaccine. She knows the child has had the vaccine and it it is a known phenomenon that live virus vaccines can shed. I would think erring on the side of safety here would not be discriminatory. It would be the same as if her sister called and said "geez, our 4 year old was exposed to measles or chicken pox or some other illness, he isn't showing signs of illness, but we thought we'd let you know."

Yes, she knows these children have had exposure...through vaccination.

[MeepyCat]

If you've had the MMR yourself, or if you had your titers checked and showed immunity to measles, mumps and rubella, you would have no worries about viral shedding even if it did happen. Many doctors will check titers routinely early in pregnancy, as the MMR can wear off.

Also, someone should check me here, but IIRC, rubella is only an issue if you're exposed to it at a specific stage of fetal development. By 39 weeks in pregnancy, your baby's organs are pretty fully developed and rubella should not be a problem.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by MeepyCat

If you've had the MMR yourself, or if you had your titers checked and showed immunity to measles, mumps and rubella, you would have no worries about viral shedding even if it did happen. Many doctors will check titers routinely early in pregnancy, as the MMR can wear off.

Also, someone should check me here, but IIRC, rubella is only an issue if you're exposed to it at a specific stage of fetal development. By 39 weeks in pregnancy, your baby's organs are pretty fully developed and rubella should not be a problem.

True although I'm thinking more along the lines of being sick at all with anything....I would avoid people with the common cold if I was that pregnant. It is hard enough being that pregnant and feeling your best, let alone being sick, having to care for your other children and worrying if they may get something as well. Also titres are not an accurate reflection of immunity. People often get VPD's whose titres indicate they have adequate immunity. Just like fully vaccinated people sometimes fail to show any levels of immunity at all.

[MeepyCat]

Originally Posted by Marnica

True although I'm thinking more along the lines of being sick at all with anything....I would avoid people with the common cold if I was that pregnant.

If that's the case, the entire family pretty much has to be in quarantine and none of them are going anywhere or seeing anybody.

[an_domhan]

Originally Posted by Marnica

Provax people do want want their kids around unvaxed kids because they assume they are harboring disease (even when they are not ill). This is illogical.

I think you've misunderstood my point. Personally, I think that avoiding people because they "might" be "infectious / contagious" is irrational and only adds strain to an already polarized topic. The fact of the matter, is that there is no way of knowing who will, and who will not, at any given time, be a reservoir for a communicable disease. People that act like vaccination status precludes them from transmitting infectious disease are deluded, frankly.

In this case, a pregnant woman would be exposed to a child who has had a live virus vaccine. She knows the child has had the vaccine and it it is a known phenomenon that live virus vaccines can shed. I would think erring on the side of safety here would not be discriminatory.

I simply said to take care and not show the same behavior. Live viral vaccines can and do shed, and I did not dispute that. However, asymptomatic carriage of measles (which I believe is the vax right?) after vaccination hasn't been observed (other than the occasional case study, etc...). Does this mean it doesn't happen? Absolutely not, it has, and probably does a lot more than we know. I did say that others would find it prudent to avoid contact, but if it were me, I probably wouldn't.

It would be the same as if her sister called and said "geez, our 4 year old was exposed to measles or chicken pox or some other illness, he isn't showing signs of illness, but we thought we'd let you know."

And you make a decision whether or not this will impede your plans to visit no? Odd that some will go looking for wild-type chicken pox so they can expose their children but somehow being exposed to the vaccine strain is evil. It's all irrational. How about we treat everyone like they have no immunity, have the capability to transmit infectious disease to everyone they come into contact with, and stop trying to use vaccination status as some sort social identification? All I said, was take care not to discriminate... as I see vehemently provax people dribble hate over what a risk an unvaccinated child is, it is only fair to point out when antivax people do the same (not that the OP was)

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by an_domhan

I think you've misunderstood my point. Personally, I think that avoiding people because they "might" be "infectious / contagious" is irrational and only adds strain to an already polarized topic. The fact of the matter, is that there is no way of knowing who will, and who will not, at any given time, be a reservoir for a communicable disease. People that act like vaccination status precludes them from transmitting infectious disease are deluded, frankly.



I simply said to take care and not show the same behavior. Live viral vaccines can and do shed, and I did not dispute that. However, asymptomatic carriage of measles (which I believe is the vax right?) after vaccination hasn't been observed (other than the occasional case study, etc...). Does this mean it doesn't happen? Absolutely not, it has, and probably does a lot more than we know. I did say that others would find it prudent to avoid contact, but if it were me, I probably wouldn't.



And you make a decision whether or not this will impede your plans to visit no? Odd that some will go looking for wild-type chicken pox so they can expose their children but somehow being exposed to the vaccine strain is evil. It's all irrational. How about we treat everyone like they have no immunity, have the capability to transmit infectious disease to everyone they come into contact with, and stop trying to use vaccination status as some sort social identification? All I said, was take care not to discriminate... as I see vehemently provax people dribble hate over what a risk an unvaccinated child is, it is only fair to point out when antivax people do the same (not that the OP was)

I couldn't agree more and sorry if I misunderstood you. For me, the OP's situation had far more to do with her being pregnant than it did with trying to avoid illness for her children.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by MeepyCat

If that's the case, the entire family pretty much has to be in quarantine and none of them are going anywhere or seeing anybody.

To each his own and your statement is kind of black and white thinking. All I'm saying is if I pregnant I would avoid people that I know to be ill. Not quite sure why that is such a crazy notion to some??

[pishajane]

Originally Posted by Marnica

I couldn't agree more and sorry if I misunderstood you. For me, the OP's situation had far more to do with her being pregnant than it did with trying to avoid illness for her children.

Hey, OP here! My biggest concern is exposing my newborn to any of the viruses. I'm due on Sunday, so if my kids are exposed, then chances are my newborn will be exposed too.
I was wondering just how much of a risk that is, to both my kids and my new bub. Of course, i don't want any of us to be sick right now, but i don't want to have to avoid my family for no good reason.
Thanks for all the responses so far!