Originally Posted by huggerwocky
That is hearsay, not a fact.
And this is the difference between your opinions and ours: We've spent enough time researching them to know how to search the CDC website for information on these things. We don't have to rely on hearsay. Are you aware that you can look this information up? Are you aware that, when there is a large outbreak, the CDC usually has all of the available information, such as vax status of index case and those affected, demographics of those affected, outcomes, health (even down to including smoking status) of those who suffered serious outcomes, etc., on their website? We don't have to rely on voodoo magic or our own imaginations to figure out what's going on out there.
Originally Posted by snuggly mama
I guess I am somewhat bothered when I read about families having "chicken pox parties" when those children go on to return back to their schools/daycares and potentially expose other children who are at very real risk of developing life-threatening disease. Do those families get to KNOW that their child is being exposed to chicken pox, so they can opt to keep their own home? I am not at all suggesting that families for whom getting natural chicken pox is important should stop doing so -- for healthy children, I agree that this is a much better option. Just wondering if people understand that not ALL the talk about complications is conspiracy from the vaccine companies.
Of course we understand that there really are complications. The problem is that you surely can't expect everyone else in the world to do things harmful to their own children in order to protect yours. My daughter is not a sacrificial lamb, anymore than yours is. You're saying
that you don't think we should all stop going to pox parties, right after saying that we should somehow find a way to not spread pox. Do you see the contradiction there? You cannot have it both ways. What do you really believe? Do you believe that I have a right to do what is best for my own child or do you believe that I am supposed to do what you think is best for a very, very small subset of children? Because we aren't even talking about a majority here - we're talking about a small (albeit growing) minority of them.
And what about the fact that most of us here believe that many of the at-risk population out there wouldn't have been at-risk to begin with, if they'd never been vaccinated? Of course that isn't the case with your own child, who had problems from birth, but what about all those kids out there who were born perfectly healthy, only to have their health deteriorate into severe asthma, diabetes, autoimmune disorders, etc. after receiving round after round of vaccines? If I think that doing the very thing their parents want me to do to protect their children might possibly result in my own child ending up equally damaged, why on earth would I feel a responsibility to do it? If I believe children with serious asthma are at more risk when infected with influenza or measles, but that vaccinating my child might cause her to become asthmatic, then where would be the logic in vaccinating her? If I thought kids with Crohn's disease were more likely to suffer complications from rotavirus, but that vaccinating my child could cause Crohn's disease, where would be the logic in doing so?
I think that parents with immunocompromised children often want to assign this sort of attitude of selfishness and social irresponsibility to parents like us who say our job is to look out for our own children first. The problem is that you fail to realize that, by looking out for our own children, we believe we are doing society a great service. I believe that by refusing to do something negative for my child, just to theoretically
protect someone else's, I would be decreasing her risk of contributing to her generation's huge health problems. I don't want to contribute to the huge health problems of my daughter's generation. I'm mad as hell that my tax dollars and health dollars pay for programs and additional treatments for kids who wouldn't need them if they'd never been vaccinated to begin with. (I don't think those programs should be ended, just that they shouldn't have been needed to begin with.) And my child will grow up to have to incur those same costs in the form of higher taxes, fewer social programs, crappy schools and higher health insurance costs. It isn't fair and I refuse to contribute to the problem just to give some other parents a little inappropriate peace of mind.
It would be inappropriate, too, because vaccinating my child with every vaccine out there changes her from someone who only may ever catch measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox and rotavirus into someone who is definitely shedding virus. Furthermore, it wouldn't mean she'd never contract the diseases for which she'd been vaccinated anyway. Besides both those things, it wouldn't protect your child from all the other diseases for which no vaccine exists, but which could just as easily harm an immunocompromised child. And on top of aaaalllll that, it would, IMO, leave her immune system hampered and more susceptible to all those other things, meaning she'd be more likely to spread some nameless other disease which could kill a sick child.
Again, I understand the kind of stress you must be under on a daily basis. I wish there was something I could do to help parents like you. I would love to be able to give parents of sick or immunocompromised children some peace. I can't, though. I can't sacrifice my child, possibly causing her to be in the same boat as your own and contributing to the health breakdown of an entire generation. It's not worth it and it doesn't even make sense.