or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › the term pro-vax
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

the term pro-vax

post #1 of 68
Thread Starter 

This is a bit of a spin off from a conversation on the "do no harm" thread.

 

Tea, I am one of the people who is switching over to pro-compliance and here is why:

 

The term pro-vax is too sweeping for me.  It can mean everything from "I think vaccines are great and I am going to get them for my kids…to almost everyone in my country should be on the schedule and I am behind drastic means to make this happens"  

 

I genuinely have no problems with anyone who looks at the issues and decides to vax. Indeed, I respect it.   I believe, very much, in informed consent which includes the decision to consent.  I also believe in parental authority on such issues.

 

So, in short I don't want to throw those who think vaccination is the correct personal decision for them in with those who think unvaccinated children should be evicted from schools, parents should face negligence charges, etc.  


Edited by kathymuggle - 2/7/14 at 4:20am
post #2 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

This is a bit of a spin off from a conversation on the "do no harm" thread.

 

Tea, I am one of the people who is switching over to pro-compliance and here is why:

 

The term pro-vax is too sweeping for me.  It can mean everything from "I think vaccines are great and I am going to get them for my kids…to almost everyone in my country should be on the schedule and I am behind drastic means to make this happens"  

 

I genuinely have no problems with anyone who looks at the issues and decides to vax. Indeed, I respect it.   I believe, very much, in informed consent which includes the decision to consent.  

 

So, in short I don't want to throw those who think vaccination is the correct personal decision for them in with those who think unvaccinated children should be evicted from schools, parents should face negligence charges, etc.  

 

Thanks for making the thread. 

 

Sure, a person who is "pro vaccine" might be in favor of mandatory vaccination for all children, but I should think most people understand that there is a range. 

 

A person who considers themselves  pro breastfeeding doesn't necessarily mean that they want to ban all formula and are in favor of passing laws that force women to breast feed.   I would never think that someone who identified as pro breastfeeding automatically felt that way.  Are there some? sure.  Fairly recently Gisele (the supermodel) made statements that she thought it should be a mandatory law that women breast feed for at least the first year after giving birth, or something along those lines. 

 

Ditto being pro cloth diapering, or pro baby led weaning, or pro co sleeping, baby wearing etc etc.   I just assume that person means that, for them (or they may even think that for most children), the benefits outweigh the cons/risks. I do not take those terms to mean that they think parents should be forced into these parenting decisions.  But like I said, there are of course going to be extremes on almost any position. 

 

Edit to add: The reason I don't like "pro-compliance" is because it comes across as sounding as though we are only doing it because people are telling us it's best.  Like we aren't making a conscientious decision on the matter.   Even if my child went to a school where it was easy to file an exemption I would still vaccinate.  In my state it's actually extremely easy to get exemptions for vaccines.  It allows religious, medical, and philosophical exemptions.  There is no pressure in that sense to vaccinate him.  Even if my pediatrician was lax on vaccines, I would still choose them for my son.  

 

I do think that pro-compliance is lumping us in with parents who never look into it and just do what the doctor tells them.  Which is fine, honestly.  They are following their pediatrician's advice on the matter.  I do not think that the regular pro vaccine posters on this forum fall into that category, though.  And I think the term discounts the usually very well informed opinions/posts on the matter by those of us on the pro-vaccine side of the issue on this forum. 


Edited by teacozy - 2/6/14 at 7:31pm
post #3 of 68

I am not fond of "pro-compliance" either for the above stated reasons.

 

And I think the vast majority of us are pro-vaccine-safety -- I think it's rather confusing to use that term to refer to people who choose not to vaccinate.

 

I have tried to switch to "non-vax" instead of "anti-vax", as requested.  I really think "pro-vax" and "non-vax" are the most accurate terms, even though both of them do represent a spectrum of views and practices.

post #4 of 68
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

 

And I think the vast majority of us are pro-vaccine-safety -- I think it's rather confusing to use that term to refer to people who choose not to vaccinate.

 

 

This is just my opinion - I will be interested to see if others share it.

 

Sometimes pro-vaxxers do not come across to me as overly interested in vaccine safety.  Some are so busy telling us that vaccines are great, vaccines are safe, the risks are smaller than the benefits, any issues are remedied quickly, etc etc, that they fail to show much concern with vaccine safety.  

 

It might just be the nature of debate on MDC on this very polarised issue.  


Edited by kathymuggle - 2/7/14 at 4:21am
post #5 of 68

I believe most vaccines are safe.  (I know that not everybody does, but let's maybe please keep this a discussion about preferred labels -- there are only about a thousand other threads about vaccine safety.)  That doesn't make me anti-vaccine-safety, which is the bookend term to pro-vaccine safety.

post #6 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

I am not fond of "pro-compliance" either for the above stated reasons.



 



And I think the vast majority of us are pro-vaccine-safety -- I think it's rather confusing to use that term to refer to people who choose not to vaccinate.



 



I have tried to switch to "non-vax" instead of "anti-vax", as requested.  I really think "pro-vax" and "non-vax" are the most accurate terms, even though both of them do represent a spectrum of views and practices.


 



As a member of the mushy middle, I'd be OK with the term "vaccine skeptic." That term could also include the non-vaxxers. I'm definitely not "non-vax." Whether I accept or decline a vaccine, I spend a lot of time questioning if I made the right decision.

"Pro-compliance," to me, simply means that one believes that everybody, save the rare few with medical reasons, should choose to comply with their government's vaccine schedule. A number of pro-compliance people in the U.S. would readily criticize me for following, say, the British schedule.
post #7 of 68
What are thoughts on "vaccine critic?"

I don't think "non-vax" is accurate, for a number of reasons. For one thing, a significant number of parents who no longer agree to vaccines have children who have received 2-3 times MORE vaccines than most of the adults who criticize those no-longer-vaccinating parents.

For another thing, many of us are still considering some vaccines.

Should we have a separate term for pro-vax people who demand compliance/mandatory vaccines for others who don't want them?
post #8 of 68
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

Edit to add: The reason I don't like "pro-compliance" is because it comes across as sounding as though we are only doing it because people are telling us it's best.  Like we aren't making a conscientious decision on the matter.   Even if my child went to a school where it was easy to file an exemption I would still vaccinate.  In my state it's actually extremely easy to get exemptions for vaccines.  It allows religious, medical, and philosophical exemptions.  There is no pressure in that sense to vaccinate him.  Even if my pediatrician was lax on vaccines, I would still choose them for my son.  

 

 

I can see your point.

 

Still, that wasn't my intent in using the term pro-compliance. The intent was to break down a huge umbrella term (pro-vax) into smaller categories to specify exactly which group I was talking about.  To be more precise.  

 

so….still in search of a word.  

 

Do you mind the term pro-vax? I wonder how a pro-vaxxer who does not believe in mandatory vaccines in any way feels being  lumped in with those who might believe in mandatory vaccine?


Edited by kathymuggle - 2/7/14 at 1:49pm
post #9 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

I can see your point.

 

Still, that wasn't my intent in using the term pro-compliance. The intent was to break down a huge umbrella term (pro-vax) into smaller categories to specifies exactly which group I was talking about.  To be more precise.  

 

so….still in search of a word.  

 

Do you mind the term pro-vax? I wonder how a pro-vaxxer who does not believe in mandatory vaccines in any way feels being  lumped in with those who might believe in mandatory vaccine?

 

It may not have been your intent, but that's how the term pro-compliance comes across to me and at least one other pro-vaxxer here. 

 

I am fine with pro-vaccine.  I have read blogs before written by people who believe that vaccines should be mandatory for all children who don't have a medical exemption and they have called themselves pro mandatory vaccination.    So I guess if a person fits into that category they can use that term. 

post #10 of 68

We aren't allowed to discuss mandatory vaccination policies here, so I don't know how you would determine who is "pro-compliance" and who is not.  I'm most comfortable with "pro-vax/pro-vaccine".  I'm also comfortable using the term "vaccine critic" and will try to remember to use it unless there is something more preferable.

post #11 of 68
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

We aren't allowed to discuss mandatory vaccination policies here, so I don't know how you would determine who is "pro-compliance" and who is not.  I'm most comfortable with "pro-vax/pro-vaccine".  I'm also comfortable using the term "vaccine critic" and will try to remember to use it unless there is something more preferable.

 

I don't think pro-compliance only relates to madantory vaccines.
 
If one thinks someone should just do what the doctor tells them, then they are pro-compliance.
 
If one is  pro stacking the deck in a way that promote compliance and has significant consequences for not vaccinating (losing doctors, school exemptions, etc)  I consider that pro-compliance.  
 
None-the-less, I might return to pro-vax.  Tea has a point.  I might still feel a bit odd writing it as I have come to see  pro-vaxxers as a negative term  (as a good chunk of them do want to take away rights and are pretty scathing towards non-vaxxers) but I am not sure what is a better term.
 
I like vaccine critic as well.  
post #12 of 68

I do not believe that a system that has consequences for certain choices is anywhere near the same as trying to take those choices away from people.  I also don't believe anyone who cares enough to post on a vaccination forum vaccinates just because they were told to.  I am finding the term "pro-compliance" more and more offensive the more it is explained.

post #13 of 68
Thread Starter 
not worth it

Edited by kathymuggle - 2/7/14 at 1:06pm
post #14 of 68

ETA that this is was in response to a post kathymuggle edited out, in which she stated that she would continue to use the term "pro-compliance".

 

I think it does not promote dialogue or respect when a person continues to use a term (or a smiley) that she has been specifically told is offensive.


Edited by chickabiddy - 2/7/14 at 1:53pm
post #15 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

I think it does not promote dialogue or respect when a person continues to use a term (or a smiley) that she has been specifically told is offensive.

 

I actually agree with this;  in fact, I think you're being AWFULLY polite about it! I'd state it even more strongly:  I think it's extremely disrespectful, and I think it shuts down dialog.

 

Chickabiddy, I'm still not clear on why "pro-compliance" is objectionable.  Can you explain more?  My understanding of the term is not that it's about the compliance of the person described, but the fact that the person described is demanding compliance from others.  No matter what.


About the popcorn dude: this is the first I've ever heard that it's considered rude.  Now that it's been explained, I do get it.  I just wanted to say, I always understood it as "this is a very interesting/entertaining discussion; I have nothing to add, but I can't wait to see the responses."

post #16 of 68
Thread Starter 
nm

Edited by kathymuggle - 2/7/14 at 1:11pm
post #17 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 
 

Chickabiddy, I'm still not clear on why "pro-compliance" is objectionable.  Can you explain more?  My understanding of the term is not that it's about the compliance of the person described, but the fact that the person described is demanding compliance from others.  No matter what.


About the popcorn dude: this is the first I've ever heard that it's considered rude.  Now that it's been explained, I do get it.  I just wanted to say, I always understood it as "this is a very interesting/entertaining discussion; I have nothing to add, but I can't wait to see the responses."

 

My understanding of pro-compliance is the same as yours Taxi.

post #18 of 68
Thread Starter 

also not worth it.

 

 

 

post #19 of 68

So.... if pro-compliance is objectionable, is there a word that isn't?  I think it's useful to be able to differenciate between people who simply believe vaccines to be beneficial, and people who believe that they are beneficial, and that everybody should comply with the schedule, with as few exceptions as possible, and if pro-complicance is objectionable I would gladly use another word, but can't think of one.

post #20 of 68
Quote:
About the popcorn dude: this is the first I've ever heard that it's considered rude.  Now that it's been explained, I do get it.  I just wanted to say, I always understood it as "this is a very interesting/entertaining discussion; I have nothing to add, but I can't wait to see the responses."

Exactly. We have always used it on Mothering as a short cut to "follow" the conversation when we are interested but have nothing to add. It is actually called the "lurk" smiley. It has been used in multiple forums this way and this is the only forum and only in the last few months that I've seen anyone  take offense to it, yet they never bothered to express exactly why they found it offensive until the last day or two. I will try to remember in the future not to use it here, but next time you might ask what is meant instead of automatically taken offense.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › the term pro-vax