Changes to the Vax forums - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-19-2013, 09:35 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

Computers and smartphones and digital photo contests are not so very natural.  Mothering.com embraces non-"natural" choices when it suits them.

Computers, smartphones, and digital photo contests are not invasive medical procedures. Vaccination and circumcision are.
Taximom5 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 08-19-2013, 09:58 AM
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,031
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)

Technology is of course not invasive medical procedures... oh wait technological advances do play into new and great medical procedures.

Imakcerka is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 10:10 AM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There is going to be a Vax'ing parents forum. I think it is a hair splitting, academic point that there should also be a forum for 'I am not deviating from government mandates/advisory committee reccommendations in any way whatsoever.' That is what is against the spirit of MDC: not any one Vax, but the idea that advisory committees & governments should be making these decisions, rather than mothers.
dinahx is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 10:14 AM
 
TCMoulton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 4,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Computers, smartphones, and digital photo contests are not invasive medical procedures. Vaccination and circumcision are.

If you want to be that picky then cutting a lip or tongue tie could also be considered "invasive" yet those choices are fully supported here.
TCMoulton is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 10:30 AM
 
TCMoulton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 4,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

There is going to be a Vax'ing parents forum. I think it is a hair splitting, academic point that there should also be a forum for 'I am not deviating from government mandates/advisory committee reccommendations in any way whatsoever.'.

I agree. Unless you have opted for your child (children) and yourself to receive every single shot and booster available then you absolutely fit within the parameters of the selective/delayed forum.
TCMoulton is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 10:40 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post


If you want to be that picky then cutting a lip or tongue tie could also be considered "invasive" yet those choices are fully supported here.

But cutting lips and tongues are not mandated for healthy children with no lip or tongue issues.  My point was that vaccination is an invasive procedure that is MANDATED for healthy children.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 10:42 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)

Here's another way to think about it.  The vast majority of mothers can produce milk, but a small minority, for a variety of legitimate reasons, cannot.  Should the government mandate formula for all babies, to protect the children of mothers who can't produce milk?

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 10:46 AM
 
TCMoulton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 4,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

But cutting lips and tongues are not mandated for healthy children with no lip or tongue issues.  My point was that vaccination is an invasive procedure that is MANDATED for healthy children.

Unless someone is forcibly vaccinating all US citizens then vaccinations are not MANDATED for all healthy children.
TCMoulton is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 10:49 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imakcerka View Post

Technology is of course not invasive medical procedures... oh wait technological advances do play into new and great medical procedures.

Of course. But those new and great medical procedures are not mandated on healthy people who do not need them.

 

Should mammograms be mandated for all women of all ages?  Mammograms can catch early-stage breast cancer--and can also result in unnecessary and invasive procedures, including lumpectomies on suspected cancers that...turn out to not be cancer.  There's also the question of repeatedly subjecting tissue to radiation.  Anybody wonder how men would react if it were their privates that were squashed and irradiated on a regular basis? How about colonoscopies? They can catch early-stage colon cancer--but I know 3 people who had severe complications from their colonoscopies, including  perforation and infection.  Should colonoscopies be mandated? 

 

Nobody has (yet) been told that they cannot show up to school or to work if they have not had a mammogram or a colonoscopy.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 11:04 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post


Unless someone is forcibly vaccinating all US citizens then vaccinations are not MANDATED for all healthy children.

But parents have been subjected to threats that their babies will be removed from their care if they do not submit to the hep B vaccination in the hospital.  At least one baby WAS taken, from a mother at Hershey Medical Center: http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/2012/order_denying_motion_to_dismiss.pdf

 

In addition, children are barred from attending schools;  even in states where philosophical and/or religious exemptions exist, parents are not advised of these exemptions, and are instead told that their children must have all their shots or they will be barred from school.  No exemptions mentioned.  

 

Finally, pediatricians are refusing to accept children as patients if they are not fully caught up on the recommended vaccination schedule.  So vaccines are, in effect, mandated in order to receive medical care.  And there have been reports from posters here at MDC that they were threatened with action from CPS (implying removal of their children) if they did not have them completely caught up on the recommended vaccination schedule.

 

If parents are deliberately led by government representatives, by school administrators, by doctors, nurses and hospital administrators, and by the news media  to believe that vaccination is mandated, that is the same thing as mandating vaccines.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 04:44 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,231
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by japonica View Post

 

If I vaccinated on schedule, my kids' doctor would probably applaud my good sense. The government would quit hassling us and threatening to withhold our tax benefits. The community at large who write letters to the editor stating that my parental rights should be terminated could rest easy that we've done the right thing. Hospital ER doctors would quit lecturing us and stomping off to write letters of protest to our GP. The media could rest on their laurels that their "No jab, no play" campaign was a huge success. Over here, following the schedule isn't controversial or contested ground: it's what's expected of everyone and government, doctors, schools, hospitals, media, and the community in general provide support, benefits, and accolades to parents who do what they expect.

 

FTR, we're going from no vaccinations to date to selective/delayed. Yet, despite this, we will still be considered, for government purposes, as if we're non-vaccinators because doing anything less than the full schedule is tantamount to none.

 

Edited to add: oh goody. Today it was announced that if the current government gets re-elected, the Conscientious Objection loophole for receiving the Family Tax Benefit will be closed. Nice atmosphere of intolerance building up here.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/rudd-closes-immunisation-loophole/story-e6frg6nf-1226699080977

 

 

 

greensad.gif

 

That sucks, japonica.  I wish it wasn't like that for you.


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
Old 08-19-2013, 05:08 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,231
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

Computers and smartphones and digital photo contests are not so very natural.  Mothering.com embraces non-"natural" choices when it suits them.

The idea that we all need to live in caves with no modern conveniences at all or embrace all modern technology/inventions is a false dichotomy.  O/T - but it is an argument that bugs me.

 

FWIW, I am with BeckyBird.

 

Yes - a pro vax forum is unlikely to be highly used, however it is inclusive, may make modding easier and may cut down on inappropriate bickering. 


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
Old 08-19-2013, 05:29 PM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,969
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

The idea that we all need to live in caves with no modern conveniences at all or embrace all modern technology/inventions is a false dichotomy.  O/T - but it is an argument that bugs me.

FWIW, I am with BeckyBird.

Yes - a pro vax forum is unlikely to be highly used, however it is inclusive, may make modding easier and may cut down on inappropriate bickering. 

That would be a plus.

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 05:34 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I also wouldn't be opposed to a forum for formula users if it was something that enough people wanted and would use. (We got a Cesarean forum a while back because there was a lot of interest.) The difference there is that the Breastfeeding forum isn't called "Infant Feeding" and doesn't consist in large part of the two groups sniping at each other, with a subforum for exclusive breastfeeders and one for combo-feeders but none for exclusive formula feeders. That would be more of an analogous situation, and moms who consciously chose formula for what they felt were good reasons would have good rights to be irritated by that, imo. As it is, a formula feeder doesn't have much reason to go in the breastfeeding forum, but is (hopefully) unlikely to get hassled much if they post a thread about formula in Life With A Babe. So it's really not the same. 

 

Not everything on MDC is based in what is natural. Take the TV forum, for instance. TV is definitely not natural! But nobody is debating the right of that forum to exist. 

 

As for this topic, just because vaxxing on schedule is the mainstream decision doesn't mean there is nothing that people might want to discuss about it, so I think the posts saying "this group doesn't really need support or a space to talk" are kind of disingenuous. Because the rest of the world supports us that is license to pick on us at MDC? That doesn't seem very fair. 

erigeron is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 06:14 PM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Give us an example of a topic in the Vax'ing completely On Schedule Forum that would NOT work in Selective and Delayed, please. I actually think the request is for a 'Voices for Vaccines' type forum where there can be 'Support Only' posts about how ignorant and ridiculous the rest of us are.

 

A Combo-Feeding forum would inevitably become pretty much a FF forum, as the arrangement tends to benefit Formula and cause the cessation of BreastMilk production, that is exactly the problem with Formula Marketing, because most Formula manufacturers understand that dynamic quite well . . . 

 

On other MommyForums I am on, mothers post things like '3 Enfamil Coupons up for Grabs!' and that would not happen on Mothering, and actually is a WHO code violation . . . 

 

It would be as inappropriate here as a thread on 'Is Gomco Clamp or PlastiBell a better alternative in terms of an Attractive Glans?' . . . 

dinahx is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 06:15 PM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I see a Cesarean Forum as not the same as following the CDC forum, because many natural mothers would find themselves in a situation where a Cesarean is not avoidable due to a health condition or a geographic location . . . I also generally feel that these mothers are trying to make the Cesareans mother/baby friendly.

 

It would be like having a forum for Cesareans and another for 'OBs know Best & We are doing exactly What they Say' or one for inevitable Cesareans and another for completely elective Cesareans.

dinahx is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 06:50 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Selective/delayed tends to skew VERY selective and VERY delayed, or at least so it always felt to me. Like I've already said in this thread, it's a different mindset. There's a difference between having a baseline of not vaxing and maybe giving a few, or having a baseline of following the schedule and maybe delaying a few. Someone on one side of that is going to have a hard time finding support in a forum that consists primarily of the other camp. So I don't have a specific example of a thread. It is more about the people who will be mostly attracted to and posting in each subforum. This has happened before--back in the days of the old sel/del forum we had a "one thread" for vaxing on schedule. And I do understand that there are some threads in the current forum that make those who skew closer to non-vaxing than I do feel unwelcome.

 

Naming the forum "selective/delayed" says that those who vaccinate on schedule aren't welcome, despite any talk in threads like this about how  "following the schedule"="selecting the schedule"="selective". A new person who is just looking at the forums will assume that full vaxxers are not welcome. 

 

(And for the record, I do technically fit into the selective/delayed criteria. I just don't feel like I fit into the selective/delayed forum, the way it ends up being.)

erigeron is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 07:05 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by erigeron View Post

 So I don't have a specific example of a thread. 

IF one follows "the schedule" what kind of support are the looking for that they don't already get? Society supports them, the medical community does, etc

 

What are they hoping to get here? I really don't see this as support but validation  -  they made their choice, you don't undue a vaccination. IF you question what you are doing you are not looking for support in on-schedule section, you would be looking in the other section- would you not?


 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 07:14 PM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I see the point, why can't we just call it 'Selective/Delayed/Mindful Vaccination? 

 

As a non-vax'er (at the moment) I tend to only run into people who don't seem to be selecting or delaying too much (like selecting every vax but varicella, or delaying only by a few months) but I don't spend much time in those forums, (I only go to Discussion/Debate really) so IDK . . . 

dinahx is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 07:24 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,612
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post

IF one follows "the schedule" what kind of support are the looking for that they don't already get? Society supports them, the medical community does, etc

 

What are they hoping to get here? I really don't see this as support but validation  -  they made their choice, you don't undue a vaccination. IF you question what you are doing you are not looking for support in on-schedule section, you would be looking in the other section- would you not?

 

This is my question too.


t
 
"There are only two mistakes you can make in the search for the Truth. Not starting, and not going all the way." ~ Mark Passio
Mirzam is online now  
Old 08-19-2013, 08:04 PM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I liked Mindful some because it implied that even if one was scheduled, one was aware of issues/brands/ingredients. Which I do see as a NL choice, like choosing the best brand of GMO free formula . . . (Of course there are no OG Vaxes but there are better ones).
dinahx is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 08:10 PM
 
rnra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

I actually think the request is for a 'Voices for Vaccines' type forum where there can be 'Support Only' posts about how ignorant and ridiculous the rest of us are.

When I visit the non-vaccinating forum, I certainly see a lot of talk (outright or implied) about how 'ignorant,' 'ridiculous,' and 'uneducated' those who choose to vaccinate are.  I realize that's not the point for either type of forum; but, to say it doesn't also happen in the reverse situation is simply untrue.

 

Parents who vaccinate fully according to schedule (whatever that schedule may be) certainly still have issues, questions, concerns, and ideas that they would like to discuss with a group of other like-minded parents without having their choice up for debate.

rnra is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 08:11 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

I liked Mindful some because it implied that even if one was scheduled, one was aware of issues/brands/ingredients. Which I do see as a NL choice, like choosing the best brand of GMO free formula . . . (Of course there are no OG Vaxes but there are better ones).

 

By only calling one side "mindful" you imply the other is NOT! that is offensive to many


 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 08:28 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,231
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post

 

By only calling one side "mindful" you imply the other is NOT! that is offensive to many

Agreed.  Either use mindful in front of each subforum - or leave it out altogether.


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
Old 08-19-2013, 08:38 PM
 
MichelleZB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,018
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
It's not really productive to bring up things like crying it out on this thread. Mothering unequivocally does NOT support a crying it out approach, and makes that very clear everywhere. Should there be a crying it out thread? Obviously not on Mothering.

But Mothering does not have an official stance on vaccinations, encouraging research instead. That is why people who vaccinate and those who don't both want to be able to discuss issues in the vaccinating forums--because, officially, Mothering supports both decisions.

I don't think the forum really does support both choices, however. They discourage vaccinations, and most of their moderation choices reflect that, including this one.

It certainly would cause way fewer arguments, and cause way less strife, if there were simply three separate posting spots for 1) no vaccines 2) some vaccines and 3) all vaccines. People usually fall in one of the three camps, and it really is the simplest solution to separate everyone out.

The other thing that has become unproductive here is repeatedly asking a mothering mom who vaccinates her children: "But WHY do you feel left out of our forum? WHY should you want support?" Many moms have answered that question already; it won't help to ask again.
MichelleZB is online now  
Old 08-19-2013, 08:47 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,231
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleZB View Post



I don't think the forum really does support both choices, however. They discourage vaccinations, and most of their moderation choices reflect that, including this one.

 

Non-vaxxers think otherwise.

 

I have heards that mods say pro-vax thinks non-vax is favoured in moderation, while non-vax thinks vax is favoured in moderation.  

 

Really, I think the mods do the best they can and try to be fair, in accordance with their guidelines.


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
Old 08-19-2013, 08:56 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleZB View Post

"But WHY do you feel left out of our forum? WHY should you want support?" Many moms have answered that question already; it won't help to ask again.

I asked this - IF one follows "the schedule" what kind of support are the looking for that they don't already get?

 

Where is that answer? I haven't seen it so that is why I asked it. All I keep reading is the need but when asked for what reason no answers appear but a repeat of the "need" - the question again is need for what? Society has the deck stacked on the side of those who vaccinate on the schedule, not on the side of those who don't follow the schedule, it's not like it's even close to even.


 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 08-19-2013, 11:13 PM
 
TCMoulton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 4,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post

I asked this - IF one follows "
the schedule"
 what kind of support are the looking for that they don't already get?


Where is that answer? I haven't seen it so that is why I asked it. All I keep reading is the need but when asked for what reason no answers appear but a repeat of the "need" - the question again is need for what? Society has the deck stacked on the side of those who vaccinate on the schedule, not on the side of those who don't follow the schedule, it's not like it's even close to even.

A crunchy, AP-minded mom who chooses to vaccinate her child(ren) probably wouldn't feel too welcome joining and asking a question regarding a vaccine somewhere more mainstream like Babycenter. Yes, I assume even those who vaccinate on schedule have questions about possible reactions, scheduling, etc.

My question is why do you feel so threatened to have a place for the moms who choose to fully vaccinate here at MDC - if everyone sticks to their own corner of the web you really don't even have to acknowledge they are here.
TCMoulton is offline  
Old 08-20-2013, 12:42 AM
 
japonica's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canada-->Australia
Posts: 969
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

greensad.gif

 

That sucks, japonica.  I wish it wasn't like that for you.

 

Thanks. It's not mandatory vaccination, but there's a serious anti-choice vibe going on here. 

 

What I don't get is that the tax benefits etc. will be linked to a child's UTD status. Now, any declined/omitted vaccines will mean someone is not UTD. There's been a lot of talk in the media about the HPV vax here and the supposed low uptake. HPV is on the schedule. So, I guess those parents who don't want their kids getting it, are then ineligible for the payments as well, but there's no outcry about that. 

 

Edited to add: Yeah, going home looks better all the time, LOL, us slack Canadians and our lousy compliance rates, yet not withholding someone's tax benefits based on the vax status of their kids...can you imagine it in Canada? Sheesh.


Mother to DD#1  s/b @40w 2003 for unknown reasons; DD#2   nearly 10 years old; DS  6.5 years old 
  Why are daughters protected but not sons?
 
 
 
  
japonica is offline  
Old 08-20-2013, 04:52 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleZB View Post


The other thing that has become unproductive here is repeatedly asking a mothering mom who vaccinates her children: "But WHY do you feel left out of our forum? WHY should you want support?" Many moms have answered that question already; it won't help to ask again.

 

This, totally. A lot of threads in INV get my hackles up, but I know they're not for me and I'm not going to go around saying the forum shouldn't exist. shrug.gif

 

Though this thread is basically an intellectual exercise at this point, as Cynthia has made it pretty clear that there aren't going to be any changes made. 

erigeron is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off