Would you bring your child to a measles party? - Mothering Forums
View Poll Results: Would you bring your child to a measles party?
Yes 26 20.00%
No way 73 56.15%
Maybe - I'm not sure 31 23.85%
Voters: 130. You may not vote on this poll

1 2 
Women's Health > Would you bring your child to a measles party?
emma1325's Avatar emma1325 03:25 AM 03-21-2009
Why or why not?

Thanks.

ema-adama's Avatar ema-adama 03:53 AM 03-21-2009
I would prefere DS (and any siblings) to have measles before 9 years of age. If there were a measles party I would send DS in a flash if he were over 5 and I would umm and ahh if he were between 3-5 and I probably wouldn't if he were under 3. If he were over 9, not sure.... maybe until 13..... don't know, will have to think about that some more.
kalisis's Avatar kalisis 04:59 AM 03-21-2009
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.
emma1325's Avatar emma1325 05:26 AM 03-21-2009
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.

Why would you think someone would flame you for your answer here?
ema-adama's Avatar ema-adama 07:45 AM 03-21-2009
I forgot to mention why

I would prefer the disease to be over at an age where there is a smaller chance of there being serious complication. I have understood the ages 5-9 to be the optimal ages. If my child got through childhood unvaccinated and had not had the disease, I would be worried about them contracting the disease as an adult, and I am not sure about vaccinating adults (although that would be my DC's decision by then).

I should also say that I would not send my child to a party of any sorts if they were sick or generally run down.... for me this is all a bit theoretical.That is how I got childhood diseases - through purposeful exposure to those ill with the disease.

I certainly would not flame any mama making a different choice.
FunkyBunny's Avatar FunkyBunny 08:20 AM 03-21-2009
NO! I would let it come natural.
Sileree's Avatar Sileree 08:26 AM 03-21-2009
Definitely. In my opinion measles is a mild childhood disease.
becca_howell's Avatar becca_howell 08:29 AM 03-21-2009
I would prefer if they do get it that they get it by normal contact, not a "party". Aside from that, my LOs are too little right now for me to even think of it.
KimberlyD0's Avatar KimberlyD0 09:50 AM 03-21-2009
Not a chance

Its my job as a parent to keep then safe and healthy. Perposly exposing them to something to make them sick goes against that compleatly.

Pox and Measle Partys make 0 sence to me.
Marnica's Avatar Marnica 10:28 AM 03-21-2009
Im not sure...My LO is too little right now and I have time to think about this. While I would like him to get the mild childhood illnesses at the "right" age. I don't know that Id go out of my way to expose them. I would also worry about DH and myself since Im sure our artificial immunity from our MMR has waned by now and I'm not about to get get one now so I would be concerned about being around my LO if he did get the measles. Just not sure!
runes's Avatar runes 02:21 PM 03-21-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimberlyD0 View Post

Its my job as a parent to keep then safe and healthy. Perposly exposing them to something to make them sick goes against that compleatly.
That's how I feel about vaccines!

And also why we don't go to the doctor's office. Of course we would go if we *really* needed to, but so many kids get sick from going to the MD's, it's certainly not an intentional exposure to illnesses but it sure does happen a lot, doesn't it?

As for the poll answer, my thoughts mirror ema-adama's. We are planning to get titres checked at around 5-6 years old, and we'll take it from there. One of the major pro's of an intentional exposure like measles and pox parties is that I will know exactly when DD would be exposed, so that we can then quarantine her during the time that it is contagious. From a public health standpoint, that would be the "best" way to do it...only those that want to be exposed will be exposed, and then the child will have lifelong immunity.

Question for those who might do the measles vax for their older child...will you be getting titres drawn first?
medusaatemydog's Avatar medusaatemydog 03:34 PM 03-21-2009
i would...absolutely, i have read up about the disease and don't see the big deal. Of course i would have plenty of supplements on hand and i know my doctor would not throw me from thier practice<snark. It was once considered a mild common childhood disease with little or no complications, few children ever really suffered from complications and considering that it is a lot healthier to go through the measles than to submit to the vaccine... yes!
k9sarchik's Avatar k9sarchik 03:41 PM 03-21-2009
If I lived somewhere that measles can get acquired naturally I'd take that route, but since it's pretty rare in the US for that to happen I would do the measles party. All of my parents and grandparents had measles when they were kids and they all said it was no big deal. EVERYONE used to get measles.
It's a normal childhood illness and a right of passage IMO.
just_lily's Avatar just_lily 04:02 PM 03-21-2009
I wouldn't freak out if my kid got measles, but I don't plan on deliberately exposing her either.

I understand why some people would though, it is just not my choice.
Raene's Avatar Raene 05:22 PM 03-21-2009
Chicken pox, yes...measles, no. Maybe just b/c I don't know much about measles so that would really scare me. It's not like chicken pox where you often hear of people getting it (okay well not so much anymore, but...).
Proverbs31's Avatar Proverbs31 10:03 PM 03-21-2009
The timing would have to be right. As long as we have no infants in the home and are able to keep the whole gang quarantined for the incubation period, its definitely something I would consider. Not that I really *want* them to get measles, but I feel its better to get it over with under the best of circumstances.
stacey05's Avatar stacey05 12:06 AM 03-22-2009
I wouldn't be comfortable purposely exposing my child to an illness. If they come by it naturally, then that is a different story.
brendaziz's Avatar brendaziz 12:12 AM 03-22-2009
I'm enjoying reading everyone's answers and my jury's still out on this one.
I 100% agree w/ both sides of this one! .......
Shelsi's Avatar Shelsi 12:16 AM 03-22-2009
No because my youngest is only 20 mos old and all the literature I've read says that the high risk groups for complications from measles are those under the age of 4 and over the age of 21.
KimberlyD0's Avatar KimberlyD0 12:32 AM 03-22-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidspiration View Post
That's how I feel about vaccines!

And also why we don't go to the doctor's office. Of course we would go if we *really* needed to, but so many kids get sick from going to the MD's, it's certainly not an intentional exposure to illnesses but it sure does happen a lot, doesn't it?

As for the poll answer, my thoughts mirror ema-adama's. We are planning to get titres checked at around 5-6 years old, and we'll take it from there. One of the major pro's of an intentional exposure like measles and pox parties is that I will know exactly when DD would be exposed, so that we can then quarantine her during the time that it is contagious. From a public health standpoint, that would be the "best" way to do it...only those that want to be exposed will be exposed, and then the child will have lifelong immunity.

Question for those who might do the measles vax for their older child...will you be getting titres drawn first?
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.
mamadelbosque's Avatar mamadelbosque 12:37 AM 03-22-2009
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!!
Sijae's Avatar Sijae 01:03 AM 03-22-2009
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."
emma1325's Avatar emma1325 01:07 AM 03-22-2009
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.
KimberlyD0's Avatar KimberlyD0 01:17 AM 03-22-2009
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.
amnesiac's Avatar amnesiac 01:26 AM 03-22-2009
Sine this is about illness exposure rather than vaccines I'm moving to H&H...
jjawm's Avatar jjawm 01:30 AM 03-22-2009
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.
emma1325's Avatar emma1325 01:31 AM 03-22-2009
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.
jeliphish's Avatar jeliphish 01:33 AM 03-22-2009
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.
lacysmommy's Avatar lacysmommy 01:37 AM 03-22-2009
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.
Proverbs31's Avatar Proverbs31 02:58 AM 03-22-2009
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
1 2 

Up