or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › I'm Not Vaccinating › non-vaxxed child gets VPD - parent goes to media about "regretting decision not to vax" - does this bother you?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

non-vaxxed child gets VPD - parent goes to media about "regretting decision not to vax" - does... - Page 2

post #21 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher View Post

This is the I'm Not Vaccinating forum, which is a support forum only. The forum guidelines:

 

 

 

 

triscuitsmom, your argument seems to be advocating for vaccination. As such, your posts here are not appropriate. If you wish to state your feelings about regretting not vaccinating yourself you can do that in the Vaccination Discussions and Debate forum where the forum guidelines allow a roundtable of views and opinions. 

 

I didn't see anything in her posts that was advocating for vaccination. She shared her personal story and related how it hurt her to have people judge her for "switching sides" on the vaccine issue. Nowhere did she advocate for others to vaccinate their child, unless you already removed/cleaned up some of her posts.

post #22 of 53
Kathy, I share your concerns on two levels. The first we already discussed: Using scare tactics to sway parents into compliance. The second is that there's no balance to it.

Nobody on God's green earth will ever say that severe vaccine reactions never, ever, ever, ever happen. But the radical pro-vaxxers seem to prefer that those cases remain an anonymous abstraction. Once you put a name and face to a reaction, then it can't *possibly* be true. eyesroll.gif You will never see a MSM story about a vaccine reaction and, "Boy, we sure learned our lesson. From now on, we'll research vaccines thoroughly and advocate for more stringent vaccine safety."
post #23 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by homemademomma View Post

 

I didn't see anything in her posts that was advocating for vaccination. She shared her personal story and related how it hurt her to have people judge her for "switching sides" on the vaccine issue. Nowhere did she advocate for others to vaccinate their child, unless you already removed/cleaned up some of her posts.

Perhaps "advocating" is not the right word, which is why I said "seems to be". Regardless, this line of posting is not appropriate in this forum. This is a support forum, not a forum to argue why the decision to not vaccinate is or was not a good one. 

post #24 of 53
I was an active member of this board including being a vocal non vaccinator. I was a supporter monetarily of MDC and a supporter of people looking for support and information here.

I have to say to be told I'm now no longer welcome to share given that my experience isn't unique and I don't think people are terrible. I was there. I was the same. I think it's valid to point out I wasn't different and now what I hear is hurtful. I get the objection but it sure smacks of you just aren't good enough anymore.
post #25 of 53
I think triscuitsmom's posts are fine. She's not arguing for vaccination, she's arguing that she disagrees with the premise of this post- which is about how a parent might feel and behave when their unvaxxed kid gets a VPD. Are we not allowed to have disagreements in these forums? It's one thing to attack others' choices, and quite another to discuss your own feelings and reactions to situations you've experienced, especially when similar situations are being discussed hypothetically. When kathymuggle asked if others agreed with her statement, she was inviting a discussion that could include agreement and disagreement. This moderation feels too heavy handed.
post #26 of 53
Thread Starter 
nm
post #27 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by triscuitsmom View Post

 

That line I bolded? That's over the top offensive.

 

Two reasons... One: You can pass it on to someone who can't deal with it. Easily in fact as many of these things are easily transmitted and contagious before they are bad enough to be diagnosed.

 

Two: You are making these decisions not just for yourself but for your child and your child may not be able to deal with it just by virtue of being in a higher risk category based on age (and if your child is old enough to be out of that now, they weren't always).

 

Also as an aside... MAYBE you'd be able to deal with it. Lots of people thought the same thing and were proven wrong. And there is a lot of really undesirable things between perfect health and death.

 

Do what you'd like, but to pretend like only vaccinating has risks is not only blatently false but also offensive to those who've had to live the other side.

 

I thought the above post skated close to being pro-vax, but the others were fine.

 

I don't mind triscuit responding; it is a complicated issue.

 

One thing I do not understand about firmly switching side from non-vax to outspokenly pro-vax  (particularly if it is done very quickly, which is how it seems to be portrayed in articles) is that it seems quite reactionary.  So many factors go into choosing to vaccinate or not - disease prevalence, disease profile, vaccine safety and efficacy  are  biggies.  I can see thinking you got "disease profile" wrong or were even duped if you believed measles was always going to be a walk in the park (because you placed too much weight on anecdotes you read online) but that does not change disease prevalence rates, vaccine safety or efficacy rates.  


Edited by kathymuggle - 1/21/13 at 5:21pm
post #28 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post



Nobody on God's green earth will ever say that severe vaccine reactions never, ever, ever, ever happen. But the radical pro-vaxxers seem to prefer that those cases remain an anonymous abstraction. Once you put a name and face to a reaction, then it can't *possibly* be true. eyesroll.gif You will never see a MSM story about a vaccine reaction and, "Boy, we sure learned our lesson. From now on, we'll research vaccines thoroughly and advocate for more stringent vaccine safety."

 

Remember this article on the boy with tetanus?

 

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10855638

 

The parents in it said they wanted to write a letter to the school urging other parents to vaccinate.

 

Can you imagine how it would go over if a parent wrote a letter to the school about their childs severe vaccine reaction and urged people not to vaccinate?  

post #29 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by triscuitsmom View Post

I was an active member of this board including being a vocal non vaccinator. I was a supporter monetarily of MDC and a supporter of people looking for support and information here.

I have to say to be told I'm now no longer welcome to share given that my experience isn't unique and I don't think people are terrible. I was there. I was the same. I think it's valid to point out I wasn't different and now what I hear is hurtful. I get the objection but it sure smacks of you just aren't good enough anymore.

 



I see why the posts were flagged and why Cynthia spoke out, but I think you clarify an important distinction Triscuitsmom and that you are indeed entering the discussion for legitimate reasons.  Yes it "seemed" like it didn't belong here but in fact perhaps it does up to a point anyhow.  I wish it wasn't hurtful to you, as I think it is very hard to draw, redraw, and communicate boundaries for the group and that the intention is to create a "safe space" and this one is just tricky to see clearly.  It is intended as a non-debate area and it was feeling like a debate, but I think your comments should be included. 

 

I can completely see how a person who had decided not to vax when the possible consequences were only in their mind would after facing devastatingly real consequences would change their stance.  I do hate that the media portrays this with fireworks and hoopla, but perhaps the idea is to learn from the mistakes of others and everyone involved thinks they are doing a good deed.  It's hard to face when questioning this approach to health and asking for something better is not taken seriously.  We really should be working on something better than vaxes instead of more and more vaxes due to the autoimmune concerns... I dislike that everything in mainstream media about vaxes is pro-vax and apparently objectors are all fools and portrayed as such--that's what this type of article of course does. 

 

There are a lot of reasons to move beyond vaxes in health care approaches whichever side of the fence a person is on at this point in time, so that health care can be better than that.  It should grow better.

 

I completely disbelieve the poster who thinks that they will avoid severe illness with diet.  There is a lot to be said for good food but it doesn't eliminate risk.  I am also a very, very healthy person.  Don't catch flu, don't get hit hard, have unvaxxed kids, eat well, etc.  But no way do I think that I am in control because of the things I do right for my health.  I can do what I can but I could become severely ill next week anyway. 

 

I don't like media portrayals but I completely sympathize with anyone who has changed their stance because of the trauma of real illness.  Life is a learning journey, and when we learn, we change.

post #30 of 53
Thread Starter 

littlebirds…you should write more often - you are always a pleasure to read!

 

I have been thinking about this topic and the responses here for the past day, in an attempt to get to the heart of the issue.

 

While I don't understand instantly and completely switching sides over a serious VAD  (for the reasons outlined above) I don't think I should judge it.  It is not my business.

 

I am annoyed by the media references as discussed above, but I am also annoyed by the idea people feel duped.  That is their feeling and they are entitled to them - but I am entitled to mine of annoyance as well.  

 

Saying you were duped by non-vaxxers (and google "duped by anti-vaccination" for oodles of references to people using this terminology) implies someone or some group set out to deceive.  Most non-vaxxers do not set out to deceive anyone.  They lay out the information as they see it and that is that - it is not much different from pro-vaxxers (at least lay people who argue pro-vaccination; authorities deliberately white-washing things is another matter). 


Edited by kathymuggle - 1/22/13 at 5:45am
post #31 of 53

This whole topic is reminiscent of our  loss of freedom of speech, the press cherry picking their stories,  and making major headlines out of a parental decisions and personal ones as well.  Why doesn't the media have headlines about children injured/killed by vaccines?  Why isn't the media covering more stories of vaccine injured children? Are they not real?  Are the unvaxed kids who contracted a disease the only ones news worthy?  I like how 'they' are tooting their horn over how the flu vax is only 60% effective, yet the media is there, blaring it from everyplace known, to run out and get a flu shot.   And the only news reports of death around here involve Unvaxed people, and it's made a point in the broadcast those people were not vaxed for flu....where's all the interviews with people who got the vax, and then got the flu really bad?   MSM prints what will benefit  the news....it seems, talking about vaccine injured children in a headline is not as beneficial  or interesting as a human interest story,  as talking with a parent who changed their mind about vaccination after their child was ill.  

post #32 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

This whole topic is reminiscent of our  loss of freedom of speech,

 

Not related to vax, but we have plenty of freedom of speech.  What we don't, and IMO should not have, is the right to force venues to host our speech.  If you want to write a newspaper article about anti-vax stuff, you can.  You're free to do so.  You can't make the New York Times carry it.  You shouldn't be able to do so.  That's *their* freedom of speech.  You may not like it, but it is not unconstitutional in the least.

post #33 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

Not related to vax, but we have plenty of freedom of speech.  What we don't, and IMO should not have, is the right to force venues to host our speech.  If you want to write a newspaper article about anti-vax stuff, you can.  You're free to do so.  You can't make the New York Times carry it.  You shouldn't be able to do so.  That's *their* freedom of speech.  You may not like it, but it is not unconstitutional in the least.

So what you are saying is you are happy that the corporate controlled MSM gags non mainstream opinions? You do know that journalists that have wanted to publish information that goes against the mainstream get fired? This is why the alternative media and the internet is so important, it gives those with alternative views a voice, as long as these alternative channels of information are available to us. Once they are taken away or heavily censored, we are pretty much screwed.

post #34 of 53

I'm not saying anything of the sort, especially since this is a vax support forum.  As someone who works in publishing (not journalism) the idea of freedom of speech and censorship is near and dear to my heart, perhaps as much as the anti-vax agenda is to others.  Freedom of speech is not being infringed and no one is being censored when a media outlet chooses not to cover what someone wishes they would.

post #35 of 53
Quote:
especially since this is a vax support forum. 

 

it's under I'm NOT vaccinating

post #36 of 53

It's a support forum, so I'm not questioning anything about vaxing, just the idea of "freedom of speech" being infringed, which it is not.  I'm sorry if I did not make that clear.  (And to be nitpicky in return, this whole forum is a vax forum, and this is a support subforum.)

post #37 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

I'm not saying anything of the sort, especially since this is a vax support forum.  As someone who works in publishing (not journalism) the idea of freedom of speech and censorship is near and dear to my heart, perhaps as much as the anti-vax agenda is to others.  Freedom of speech is not being infringed and no one is being censored when a media outlet chooses not to cover what someone wishes they would.

it is when journalists are not allowed editorial freedom to report information to the general public because of corporate interests. Have you ever taken the time to look into the incestuious nature of media ownership and the pharmaceutical industry? 

 

I think you have lost your way, this is the I'm Not Vaccinating Forum.

post #38 of 53

If there is no media censorship, where are all the reports on the recent Vaccine Court awards in the MSM? 

post #39 of 53

Censorship is an authority preventing a journalist or media outlet from exercising freedom of speech.

 

A journalist or media outlet choosing to exercise freedom of speech by deciding about what they want to speak is not censorship, even if they don't want to speak about what you want them to.

 

And I am not debating vaccination in these posts.

post #40 of 53
Quote:
 (And to be nitpicky in return, this whole forum is a vax forum, and this is a support subforum.)

it's not NITPICKY as you want to say - you are wrong in thinking this is a support for vaccine section

 

 

 

 

Quote:
I think you have lost your way, this is the I'm Not Vaccinating Forum.

twins.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: I'm Not Vaccinating
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › I'm Not Vaccinating › non-vaxxed child gets VPD - parent goes to media about "regretting decision not to vax" - does this bother you?