Should parental consent always be required for vaccines. - Mothering Forums

 38Likes
  • 6 Post By kathymuggle
  • 4 Post By SilverMoon010
  • 1 Post By kathymuggle
  • 1 Post By SilverMoon010
  • 1 Post By SilverMoon010
  • 2 Post By emmy526
  • 1 Post By Deborah
  • 2 Post By kathymuggle
  • 1 Post By emmy526
  • 1 Post By kathymuggle
  • 2 Post By samaxtics
  • 1 Post By emmy526
  • 3 Post By samaxtics
  • 1 Post By ismewilde
  • 6 Post By samaxtics
  • 1 Post By ismewilde
  • 4 Post By Turquesa
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 19 Old 11-29-2015, 11:00 PM - Thread Starter
 
sciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: United Kingdom (have lived previously in the USA).
Posts: 2,707
Mentioned: 65 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Should parental consent always be required for vaccines.

75% of people who answered (at time of writing) on this mainstream site say yes: https://netivist.org/debate/vaccines...rental-consent

Most people who are in favour of vaccination are also in favour of informed consent.

It's a straw man to argue otherwise.
sciencemum is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 04:44 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,018
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2275 Post(s)
Consent means very little if it is coerced. Threats to bar children from school if parents do not comply with vaccine rules are coersive. In some areas this extends beyond schools - it can be hard to find a health care provider if one does not comply with vaccine dictates.

Most people who favour vaccines do favour informed consent - who doesn't want buy-in? - but many are willing to forgo informed consent it if it means getting a vaccine into a kid.

How much you value informed consent is put to the test when someone refuses a product/action you advocate....and vaccine advocates often fail this test.

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...


Last edited by kathymuggle; 11-30-2015 at 04:52 AM.
kathymuggle is offline  
#3 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 04:49 AM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,420
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 694 Post(s)
25 percent is no small number to advocate parental consent isn't necessary. How many people took the survey so far?

Is this 75 percent rallying anywhere, such as California when California removed parental consent for the HPV vaccine for 12-year-olds, where parental consent now isn't required? Or now NY, trying to do the same thing? Did they rally in California when they removed exemptions, allowing only the medical exemption? Are they rallying in all other states who are trying to remove exemptions? Are they writing letters? Are they speaking out? Are they writing blogs about how parental consent should be necessary? Or are they simply clicking the button indicating parental consent should be required?

ETA: I'd be more impressed if you could show us some mainstream articles or high-profile blogs that promote informed consent, parental choice, and support the idea of religious beliefs and personal beliefs when it comes to vaccination. All I see posted here by the provax is the opposite. The fact that these 75 percent pushed a button on a website to indicate their belief in parental and informed consent alone is not impressing.

Last edited by SilverMoon010; 11-30-2015 at 04:56 AM.
SilverMoon010 is offline  
 
#4 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 04:56 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,018
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2275 Post(s)
Ok - just voted to get the numbers of people who voted in the poll...and it is not telling us! The poll break down is by percentage only.
applejuice likes this.

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...


Last edited by kathymuggle; 11-30-2015 at 05:18 AM.
kathymuggle is offline  
#5 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 05:10 AM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,420
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 694 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
Ok - just voted to get the numbers of people who voted in the pol...and it is not telling us! The poll break down is by percentage only.
I did too and it still gives the pie chart showing 75 percent, 24 percent and 1 percent unsure. Did it say that for you too? Wonder if it's rigged!
applejuice likes this.
SilverMoon010 is offline  
#6 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 05:17 AM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,420
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 694 Post(s)
I also wanted to add that I do recognize some wonderful people in the provax camp do advocate for parental choice and have spoken out loudly against mandatory laws. However, the continuous slandering of the "antivax" by the many blogs posted here doesn't help in the fight against these mandatory laws.

So @prosciencemum , I'm not sure what you are showing us here. Are we supposed to be ecstatic that "mainstream provaxers" support parental choice? People we can't even see? People who are probably doing nothing about it and who aren't speaking up or educating people on the importance of parental consent and informed consent? The many blogs posted here or articles from the provax are from those such as Offit, Reiss, Orac and company, who believe people shouldn't even have religious rights regarding this matter and continuous demean the "antivax", and this all totally negates your point. You'd have to have a stronger argument than this.
applejuice likes this.

Last edited by SilverMoon010; 11-30-2015 at 05:19 AM.
SilverMoon010 is offline  
#7 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 05:31 AM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,021
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
What is 'fully informed consent'? Going over the insert would be a great start....mail the insert to the parent X number of days before vaccination, have parent write down pertinent questions relating to insert for provider....if provider cannot answer questions in a direct honest manner, giving stats on outcomes, adverse reactions, etc, and back their answer, then, 'fully informed' becomes just a nice little phrase to use to sound meaningful, which has no meaning at all, in that situation.
applejuice and Deborah like this.
emmy526 is online now  
#8 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 05:56 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,077
Mentioned: 322 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2720 Post(s)
According to the CDC a VIS qualifies as informed consent http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/about/vis-faqs.html

Should be given "prior" to vaccination but close in time. This doesn't actually mean that the parent, guardian or patient will actually have time to read the material, especially if several vaccines are given at one time.

Although there is a legal requirement, I'm pretty sure that the law has no teeth--there are no penalties for failing to provide a VIS, or for failing to get a signature from the right person that they got and read the relevant VIS, etc.

It is ritual paperwork.
applejuice likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#9 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 06:06 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,018
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2275 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
75% of people who answered (at time of writing) on this mainstream site say yes: https://netivist.org/debate/vaccines...rental-consent

Most people who are in favour of vaccination are also in favour of informed consent.
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post
What is 'fully informed consent'? Going over the insert would be a great start....mail the insert to the parent X number of days before vaccination, have parent write down pertinent questions relating to insert for provider....if provider cannot answer questions in a direct honest manner, giving stats on outcomes, adverse reactions, etc, and back their answer, then, 'fully informed' becomes just a nice little phrase to use to sound meaningful, which has no meaning at all, in that situation.
To be clear, the link PSM gave was about whether parental consent should be required for vaccines. It wasn't about informed consent. That seems to be a link she is trying to make with her second sentence, but without any substantiation.
applejuice and emmy526 like this.

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 offline  
#10 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 06:07 AM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,021
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
According to the CDC a VIS qualifies as informed consent http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/about/vis-faqs.html

Should be given "prior" to vaccination but close in time. This doesn't actually mean that the parent, guardian or patient will actually have time to read the material, especially if several vaccines are given at one time.

Although there is a legal requirement, I'm pretty sure that the law has no teeth--there are no penalties for failing to provide a VIS, or for failing to get a signature from the right person that they got and read the relevant VIS, etc.

It is ritual paperwork.
VIS 'dumbed down' sheets for parents that truly do not spell out the inherent risks involved...where the VAERS info is so small at the bottom, a person needs a magnifying glass to read it...
applejuice likes this.
emmy526 is online now  
#11 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 06:37 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,018
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2275 Post(s)
The VIS are borderline a joke.

They do not discuss efficacy rates of the vaccine or prevalence of the disease, nor do they discuss how common or uncommon complications from the diseases are.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/...ements/mmr.pdf
applejuice likes this.

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 offline  
#12 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 06:48 AM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,001
Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1377 Post(s)
Judging by the oldest comments, the poll is from Feb.

When you compare the handouts to the package inserts, the handouts are a joke. I kept the handouts for the grade 9 vaccines. If you experience an adverse reaction they tell you to use a compress. Or take acetaminophen. They don't even tell you to contact your doctor.

applejuice and Deborah like this.
samaxtics is offline  
#13 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 06:50 AM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,021
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by samaxtics View Post
Judging by the oldest comments, the poll is from Feb.

When you compare the handouts to the package inserts, the handouts are a joke. I kept the handouts for the grade 9 vaccines. If you experience an adverse reaction they tell you to use a compress. Or take acetaminophen. They don't even tell you to contact your doctor.

they ARE a joke...all info on them seems to have been cherry picked to display the best outcome for receiving the vaccine
applejuice likes this.
emmy526 is online now  
#14 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 07:21 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 4,783
Mentioned: 510 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3413 Post(s)
Reading package inserts is not part of informed consent when looking at the safety of vaccines. When I hear someone suggest reading that, I know with almost absolute certainty that person is not really for informed consent. They are just trying to scare parents. Obviously, when you follow a group of nearly 20 thousands people for a period of time there is going to be stuff that happens by coincidence. The "adverse reaction" section lists anything and everything that happened to occur during testing. As skeptical raptor put it: This section is the favorite of the vaccine denier, because they do not appreciate the utter lack of statistical evidence of correlation between these reactions and the vaccine. These are simply observations, not correlated with vaccines and certainly not established causality.

For example, under reported deaths in the Gardasil vaccine package insert it lists gun shot wounds, suicides, drug overdoses, tuberculosis, etc. Under "adverse reactions" it lists things like Urinary Tract Infections and Appendicitis. Again, those things are not going to stop happening to people just because they have received the gardasil vaccine.

To reiterate: they list everything observed, this is not evidence of causality at all. Suggesting or implying otherwise is fear mongering plain and simple.

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” ~ Christopher Hitchens

I'm a mom to two great kids and a wife to an amazing husband
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I'm also proudly #teamvax
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by teacozy; 11-30-2015 at 07:24 AM.
teacozy is offline  
#15 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 07:28 AM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,001
Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1377 Post(s)
When I was reading the package inserts for the vaccines given in Jr.high, one of them stated that the vaccine should not be given to people with neurological conditions. This was not on the information sheet I received.

If parents of children with neurological conditions do not read this info on the information sheet, how likely do you think it is that they will have looked up the package insert?
applejuice, Deborah and Xerxella like this.
samaxtics is offline  
#16 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 07:28 AM
 
ismewilde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 408
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post
they ARE a joke...all info on them seems to have been cherry picked to display the best outcome for receiving the vaccine
I recently asked for the insert for the flu vaccine (which I declined) and it only followed reactions for 3 days following the shot.
applejuice likes this.

"The soul is its own source of unfolding" - Heraclitus


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ismewilde is offline  
#17 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 07:31 AM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,001
Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1377 Post(s)
I also want to say that for me, it is a huge red flag when people don't want you to have access to information.

Huge.
samaxtics is offline  
#18 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 07:39 AM
 
ismewilde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 408
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
Reading package inserts is not part of informed consent when looking at the safety of vaccines. When I hear someone suggest reading that, I know with almost absolute certainty that person is not really for informed consent. They are just trying to scare parents. Obviously, when you follow a group of nearly 20 thousands people for a period of time there is going to be stuff that happens by coincidence. The "adverse reaction" section lists anything and everything that happened to occur during testing. As skeptical raptor put it: This section is the favorite of the vaccine denier, because they do not appreciate the utter lack of statistical evidence of correlation between these reactions and the vaccine. These are simply observations, not correlated with vaccines and certainly not established causality.

For example, under reported deaths in the Gardasil vaccine package insert it lists gun shot wounds, suicides, drug overdoses, tuberculosis, etc. Under "adverse reactions" it lists things like Urinary Tract Infections and Appendicitis. Again, those things are not going to stop happening to people just because they have received the gardasil vaccine.

To reiterate: they list everything observed, this is not evidence of causality at all. Suggesting or implying otherwise is fear mongering plain and simple.
So, all those teenage girls who had a severe reaction which are far beyond what you are mentioning is coincidence? I just don't understand how you can support a vaccine with absolutely no proof of efficacy and tons of proof against it. I think some people are more afraid of being against a vaccine and the backlash that comes with it than anything. Skeptical raptor websites and the ridiculous side effects he lists are absolutely ridiculous and meant to sidetrack you. I can't think of anyone claiming gun shot wounds, drug overdoses, etc. as adverse reactions. Its akin to the argument that anti-vaxers would blame the vaccination if they got in a car crash. It is completely ridiculous and insulting. Even more so, is the complete willingness to overlook the thousands upon thousands of stories WORLDWIDE from people who know their chances of winning in a court case against the powerful pharmaceutical companies, yet also know they have to speak up.
applejuice likes this.

"The soul is its own source of unfolding" - Heraclitus


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ismewilde is offline  
#19 of 19 Old 11-30-2015, 07:59 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,527
Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1666 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
75% of people who answered (at time of writing) on this mainstream site say yes: https://netivist.org/debate/vaccines...rental-consent

Most people who are in favour of vaccination are also in favour of informed consent.

It's a straw man to argue otherwise.
Thank you for the link to the poll. The poll is about parental consent and then your last two sentences are about informed consent. It's important not to equivocate between these two concepts because I can provide consent as a parent without having all of the facts that I need to make an informed decision.

There is a strong legislative movement in the U.S. to bypass parental consent for vaccines, especially the HPV vaccine. But then, U.S. politicians routinely refuse to represent voters, so hopefully this legislation isn't reflective of a majority.

As for informed consent, if those polls in my own country are true about most Americans wanting to ban non-medical exemptions, then most Americans would be against informed consent because there cannot be informed consent without the option of informed refusal. When the government inserts itself in the exam room with me and my doctor, it has impeded the informed consent process.

Fortunately, I don't trust those polls. The one done in California was grossly misleading.

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.” - Marcia Angell, M.D., former NEJM Editor
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Proud member of #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Turquesa is offline  
Reply


User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



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

Online Users: 18,487

39 members and 18,448 guests
aparent , blessedwithboys , Deborah , eastbaymama , EmberRaven , emmy526 , girlspn , happy-mama , hillymum , JHardy , Katherine73 , kindofcrunchy82 , kittyhersh , Leelee3 , lhargrave89 , LiLStar , Lucee , Lydia08 , Michele123 , Mirzam , moominmamma , mumto1 , NaturallyKait , Nessiesmith81 , picoloperes , rightkindofme , RollerCoasterMama , Saladd , shantimama , Skippy918 , Springshowers , StarsFall , VsAngela , zebra15 , zoeyzoo
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.