Mothering Forums - Reply to Topic

Thread: Help me out with this Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
11-19-2010 07:43 AM
carriebft

but it's not 100% effective. that's not fear based, that's a fact.  The logic is quite simple: I do not want my kids to get chicken pox. I decided to vaccinate them. I know the vaccine is not 100% effective, so i still need to take precautions against infection. One of those precautions is not having contact with recently exposed children if I can help it.

 

Obviously there are other thoughts going on, but I don't think anyone who has this logic would appreciate being told they are ignorant or making decisions from ignorance. Knowing the vaccine is not 100% effective and taking precautions is not acting from ignorance! it's acting from FACT!

 

 

the logic works with other vaccines, too. Here's another hypothetical person: I vaccinated my kids against Hep A. I know that the vaccine is not 100% effective. So when I travel to central america, I still peel fruits and vegetables and take care to wash hands. We do the best we can to prevent infection.

 

Is this person acting from ignorance or fear? no, they are just being realistic about things and acting on their wish to not be infected by Hep A. They take precautions: vaccination, peeling, washing, etc.

 

The vaccine is a layer of protection, not the be all and end all of protection. Families will chose other routes of prevention, other layers, on top of that vaccine.

11-19-2010 07:34 AM
636Jen

That's my thought too Tdunahoo.  It's all fear based. Fear comes from ignoranace. And as you said, if you took the extra measure to vax your kid, you should feel safe with that choice.  Smile and nod.  :)

11-18-2010 09:28 PM
Tdunahoo

I actually dealt with this recently in a way, my son was exposed to chicken pox and I mentioned it in my class during lab and another mom was horrified that my son wasn't vaccinated and that it is people like me who put her kids at risk, I said "but your kids are vaccinated so why are you concerned?" and she basically had no answer to why she was upset other than to repeat that I was an awful human being.

 

Anyway, I think that its a fear based thinking. Anytime I've gotten into this discussion I find that the moms don't really know why they're upset, they just are and they feel like somehow I'm putting their baby at risk. My issue is this you aren't going to keep your child locked in the house during cold/flu season b/c your kids MIGHT get the flu even if they are vax'd for it, it just doesn't make sense. If you vax'd them you feel that was an extra measure to prevent the illness and you should feel safe, with your choice, to expose them to public areas (just as I as a non-vaxing parent am ok if my kid happens to get the flu from the grocery store or play area)  I find that the best way to go about it is to just smile and nod and keep my opinions to myself. Its hard to get the two sides to agree. 

11-18-2010 01:37 PM
AllyRae

I also see this on the merck site, which also doesn't support what you're saying:

 

 

Quote:
 

The virus was initially obtained from a child with natural varicella, then introduced into

human embryonic lung cell cultures, adapted to and propagated in embryonic guinea pig cell cultures and

finally propagated in human diploid cell cultures (WI-38). Further passage of the virus for varicella vaccine

was performed at Merck Research Laboratories (MRL) in human diploid cell cultures (MRC-5) that were

free of adventitious agents.

 Nowhere in the patient information, the package insert, or the prescribing information did I find anything about the continued harvest of human fetal tissue.  Then again, I can almost be pretty certain that the government would not have allowed that to happen.  Heck, you can't even use stem cells for research without contriversy...I did not think that embryo harvesting for vaccination production would fly.

 

I did, however, find the part of the package insert that said that people who have had the vax need to stay away from immune deficient individuals for 6 weeks...I always thought it was 30 days, so I'm glad this discussion resulted in me finding that out.  That's really good for me to know as many children my DD's age are being vaccinated.

11-18-2010 01:27 PM
AllyRae

Do you have any actual proof of this?  Because that is a horrible horrible horrible allegation if you're wrong (and as a Catholic, I would think that if this were true, the Catholic Church would be all.over.this like white on rice.  Because I've read the varivax site and package insert, and this is what I found:

 

residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and protein

 

That is one cell line from the lung tissue of one aborted fetus several decades ago.  Nowhere on the package insert does it say that varivax, merck, or any drug company producing the varicella vaccine is still harvesting embryoes for this purpose.  If you have any actual solid factual information on this, I would love to hear it so I can pass it on to our diocese's bishop for his review.  It seems like it would be important for the Church leaders to know about so they can better guide members of the Church that are asking these questions.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa1970 View Post

 

I guess I must not associate with vax friendly people anymore. I guess I have gathered too many facts and have too much to say on the subject. Chicken Pox vaccination is made from aborted embryos. Not 1 miscarried emrbyo from 60 yrs ago, from many many aborted embryos. You can read about this on the manufacturers website, as long as you are willing to take the time to look up the big words you do not understand. I flat out refuse to inject my children with cells from an aborted embryo, and I refuse to fund abortions, which is what I am doing when I pay to have my child injected with cells from someone else's aborted baby. And these are healthy 3 month old female embryos, with the cells harvested within 6 hrs, so most definitely, these babies were created for the purpose of aborting. It takes thousands of these babies to make the number of shots for the chicken pox shots this world uses. Far less children die when people are not vaccinated for chicken pox than when they are, because children die just to make the shots. IF someone dares try to contest what I am saying, I tell them to use their little google tool and google the manufacturer to get the list of ingredients, or read the package insert next time they go to the doctor. Duh!

  

11-18-2010 10:06 AM
Otto
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa1970 View Post

 

Chicken Pox vaccination is made from aborted embryos. Not 1 miscarried emrbyo from 60 yrs ago, from many many aborted embryos. You can read about this on the manufacturers website, as long as you are willing to take the time to look up the big words you do not understand.


Perhaps you could point out where, as the Varivax package insert states merely that the usual WI-38 and MRC-5 lines were used for propagation.

11-18-2010 09:23 AM
636Jen

Thank you Lisa for that post.  I totally agree about the HPV vaccine.

11-17-2010 09:20 PM
Lisa1970

I should add that I live in the bible belt and even my doctor does not give those shots. Most people I know do not give those shots so I am not up against much. Plenty of kids at the local grade school get chicken pox too.

11-17-2010 09:17 PM
Lisa1970

I often start with asking people if they got the shots too. I never get why someone would give their child 50 shots by 5 yrs old, if they are not getting all those shots too. Usually, they start thinking and it does not get further than that.

 

I guess I must not associate with vax friendly people anymore. I guess I have gathered too many facts and have too much to say on the subject. Chicken Pox vaccination is made from aborted embryos. Not 1 miscarried emrbyo from 60 yrs ago, from many many aborted embryos. You can read about this on the manufacturers website, as long as you are willing to take the time to look up the big words you do not understand. I flat out refuse to inject my children with cells from an aborted embryo, and I refuse to fund abortions, which is what I am doing when I pay to have my child injected with cells from someone else's aborted baby. And these are healthy 3 month old female embryos, with the cells harvested within 6 hrs, so most definitely, these babies were created for the purpose of aborting. It takes thousands of these babies to make the number of shots for the chicken pox shots this world uses. Far less children die when people are not vaccinated for chicken pox than when they are, because children die just to make the shots. IF someone dares try to contest what I am saying, I tell them to use their little google tool and google the manufacturer to get the list of ingredients, or read the package insert next time they go to the doctor. Duh!

 

Can you tell how heated I have gotten over certain vaccinations these days? And the HPV? That one really gets to me. I do not feel parents have the right to mess with their children's sexual health. The ONLY way to get HPV is through intercourse. IF you child is planning to have intercourse (which most likely will not be at 11 yrs old) then your child should have the right to make that decision and get the shot. Your child should be fully informed as to what the shot is for, possible complications, what is in the shot, etc. The HPV shot has been banned in many countries. If your child then decides to get the HPV shot, then the child should be receiving birth control at the same time. I never understand why any parent would force the HPV shot on a girl and not get her birth control too. That one always gets to me. But regardless, I feel that when it comes to a child's sexual health, it is their body, their choice, and they should be fully informed. I also do not get forcing that shot on a child, and not explaining to the child what the shot is for. If you are that convinced your child will be having intercourse, shouldn't you explain to your child what intercourse is, and the diseases it can cause, rather than just shut up, inject the child, and walk away while the whole reality thing is hush hush? It is like the big elephant in the room. Don't tell the child what sex is, but assume she is having it and inject her with this, against her will, against real knowledge of what it is? Yuck! Disgusting! I put that in the catagory of female circumcisions.

 

Anyway, that is my view point that I share with others when need be. Somehow, no one ever argues with me anymore....but it usually stops at the part where I ask them if they had the shots.

11-17-2010 07:22 PM
AllyRae

Quote:

 

I did post this on the I'M NOT VACCINATING board to hear from other NON-VACCINATING parents.....those with experience with this.  *shrug*



 

You asked for her LOGIC behind it.  As someone who has 2 vaccinated children and 1 unvaccinated child, I was giving you some  insight into the logic behind it.  I'm sorry that I didn't get that you really just wanted support (not sure what support...support for exposing someone who did not want to be exposed?  Not sure...).  The logic behind your sister's statement is likely: vaccines aren't 100% effective.  90% effective is still greater than 0% effective.  She doesn't want her child sick.  In the 10% chance the vaccine is not effective in the particular instance of her children being exposed to your contagious children,  her children might get sick.  She doesn't want that for any number of reasons (financial burden, her kids being miserable, her kids might kill a pregnant woman's unborn child if her children were to unknowingly transmit the disease, her kids being vaccinated doesn't prevent them from TRANSMITTING the disease via getting your child's germs on their hands/clothing/toys/etc and spreading those germs someplace else, etc.).  As someone who would like to be considered a responsible non-vaxer, the responsible thing to do would be to quarantine yourself.  That would likely be the logic behind her statement.  You don't have to be a non-vaxer to be able to see that logic...

 

And if you do, well, then I'm answering your post as the mother of a child who is unvaccinated due to being immune compromised and her shotty immune system causing severe reactions to the only 2 vaccines she ever received, 20 months ago.  So, I guess I qualify to answer this question since technically,  I'm not vaccinating her, due to her pediatrician saying that at this point, future vaccinations could kill her.  (But I do vaccinate my other children for all non-live vaccines because my unvaccinated child depends on that herd immunity so I actually have the perspective of both sides...)

11-17-2010 04:32 PM
prettypixels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lydiah View Post

Honestly, I wouldnt tell anybody. I would keep my kids home as much as I could. I do know a few people who would want to be exposed but other than that I wouldnt tell anybody.


That's very interesting, thank you!

 

I vaccinate but have not yet done so for varicella.  Regardless, no vaccine is 100% protection as I'm sure you are aware.  I would not deliberately expose my kid to pertussis or measles, for example, even though she has been fully vaccinated for those things.  The severity of the illnesses and/or complications of the illnesses involved are too great for me to consider such a thing.  Just like I hold her hand in the parking lot.  Is that a 100% guarantee that no car will back into her/us?  No way.  But still I protect her to the best of my ability. 

 

Unfortunately most of the time children are not showing symptoms while they are most contagious. 

11-17-2010 01:53 PM
MountainMamaGC

Honestly, I wouldnt tell anybody. I would keep my kids home as much as I could. I do know a few people who would want to be exposed but other than that I wouldnt tell anybody.

11-17-2010 12:42 PM
lynsage

I don't vax but I would want the choice whether or not to knowingly expose my DD to chicken pox via someone else's infected child.

 

That said, I think what she said to you was just based on a knee-jerk reaction and not a logical, well-thought-out reasoning process.

11-17-2010 12:09 PM
636Jen

Quote: 

So, there's no real reason for her to say that, I'm sure it just came out in response to her fear of disease.  I doubt she took the time to really think about it other than thinking "Chicken pox!  eww, stay away!"  and she may have some underlying frustration that you do not see things in the same way as she does....as you have with her.



I can see that.  She's also the sister that, when she found out she was pregnant said, "And don't try to scare me into having a natural birth with all that midwife crap."  lol  We don't see eye-to-eye on much of anything.  I respect her decision (regardless of where it comes from) and am moving on.  I don't much care if she chooses to or not.  I was just informing her that my kids have been exposed.  We can only make choices and decisions based on the information we have, right?

11-17-2010 12:00 PM
636Jen

Quote:
Originally Posted by 13Sandals View Post

Ally Rae, I certainly hope you advocate quarantine as strongly to every mother whose 5 year old is jabbed with the varicella vaccine to make sure they aren't endangering the immuno-compromised or pregnant woman.  (Of course, before the vaccine, 93% of adults had actual immunity, so there were very few who had to worry at all).  From the VARIVAX vaccine insert: 

 

Quote:
Therefore, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid, whenever possible, close association with
susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks.

 

  I'm surprised to hear some of the folks on the "I'M NOT VACCINATING" forum feel its only acceptable to shed illness if you are following the vaccine schedule.

 

and op - I wouldn't sweat it.  respect her wishes and if you want to be snarky, make sure to ask her to return the courtesy when she and her family have flumist blown up their noses.



Thanks 13Sandals.  You're right....I'm not sweating it.  I just didn't understand the logic.  Viral shedding happens with the chicken pox vaccine as well as the flumist or any other "live virus."  How many people warn you they just got their kid immunized for chicken pox?  How many pregnant women walk into their child's preschool or elementary school who aren't immune?  Aren't they at more risk?

 

I did post this on the I'M NOT VACCINATING board to hear from other NON-VACCINATING parents.....those with experience with this.  *shrug*

11-16-2010 04:51 PM
AllyRae



I sure do...everyone we know knows darn well that if they've been exposed to an illness or if they've had a live vaccine within the past 45 days, they do NOT go near my child.  Our pediatrician even knows that and makes sure our little one is in isolation during her entire visit so she is nowhere near newly vaxed children.  Yes, ANYONE who willingly is in a position to spread a disease that could kill someone should not be around others.  And when we do have to cross that bridge with our own children (vax or exposure...we were hoping for exposure, but then I had my IC child so we couldn't expose my older two...so now I have to decide between vax and exposure, and our ped wants us to wait another 6 months-1 year to decide because either way our youngest has to be strong enough to fight the germs, whether it be natural or vaccine shedding...)

 

And I might be missing something--I didn't read anyone saying that it's acceptable to shed illness after vaccination.  I personally said you can make whatever choice for your children that you want, but you need to be responsible.  In fact, I wish more doctors emphasized that you can shed virus and get IC people ill after the chickenpox and MMR vaccines instead of ignoring that little point.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 13Sandals View Post

Ally Rae, I certainly hope you advocate quarantine as strongly to every mother whose 5 year old is jabbed with the varicella vaccine to make sure they aren't endangering the immuno-compromised or pregnant woman.  (Of course, before the vaccine, 93% of adults had actual immunity, so there were very few who had to worry at all).  From the VARIVAX vaccine insert: 

 

Quote:
Therefore, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid, whenever possible, close association with
susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks.

 

  I'm surprised to hear some of the folks on the "I'M NOT VACCINATING" forum feel its only acceptable to shed illness if you are following the vaccine schedule.

 

and op - I wouldn't sweat it.  respect her wishes and if you want to be snarky, make sure to ask her to return the courtesy when she and her family have flumist blown up their noses.



11-16-2010 04:40 PM
Arduinna

Exposure doesn't mean you will get CP anyway, my kid was exposed and never got it. My mom has had CP twice ironically.

11-16-2010 01:45 PM
13Sandals

Ally Rae, I certainly hope you advocate quarantine as strongly to every mother whose 5 year old is jabbed with the varicella vaccine to make sure they aren't endangering the immuno-compromised or pregnant woman.  (Of course, before the vaccine, 93% of adults had actual immunity, so there were very few who had to worry at all).  From the VARIVAX vaccine insert: 

 

Quote:
Therefore, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid, whenever possible, close association with
susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks.

 

  I'm surprised to hear some of the folks on the "I'M NOT VACCINATING" forum feel its only acceptable to shed illness if you are following the vaccine schedule.

 

and op - I wouldn't sweat it.  respect her wishes and if you want to be snarky, make sure to ask her to return the courtesy when she and her family have flumist blown up their noses.

11-16-2010 08:50 AM
chaoticzenmom

My child took exactly 2 weeks to show pox after exposure.

 

My first thought with your sister is that she disagrees with your decision and she is also afraid of her children possibly getting sick.  Her saying "keep your children away from mine" is a way for her to show her disapproval.  I wouldn't take it personally.  I think most people are scared of germs, even if they've been vaccinated.  I know that I never go to the store without cleaning my cart with those wipes.  I don't go to places where children gather during cold/rainy weather (which is often in Seattle.) I'm not even much of a germaphobe.

 

So, there's no real reason for her to say that, I'm sure it just came out in response to her fear of disease.  I doubt she took the time to really think about it other than thinking "Chicken pox!  eww, stay away!"  and she may have some underlying frustration that you do not see things in the same way as she does....as you have with her.

11-16-2010 06:35 AM
AllyRae


 

 

Quote:
 My thoughts on chicken pox  are that you want to get it when you're a kid and you'd want to make sure you have full immunity....especially if you plan on having kids.  Exposure could be devistating to a fetus if mom is not immune 

 

 

Maybe your sister is exposed to pregnant women and she doesn't know their immunity status, and therefore does not want to accidentally risk the life of the unborn child?  Just as I would hope, as a DEM, you are avoiding seeing clients during the incubation period so that you don't unwillingly transmit the virus to a pregnant woman who does not have immunity (YOU might be immune, but you can still transmit the virus to pregnant women and their unborn children.)

 

 

Quote:
  I feel that the chicken pox are different because everyone I know WANTS to be exposed.

 

 

Everyone you KNOW wants to be exposed (except your sister), but not everyone you come in contact with WANTS to be exposed.  If you gave my immune compromised child chicken pox because you willingly went out in public after willingly exposing your child, I would be out for blood.  I don't want to her to be exposed until she is at least 2 years old, per her pediatrician, due to the fact that it could KILL her now.  So, if you are going to expose your child to an illness on purpose, be responsible and quarantine yourself for the entire incubation period (which is like a MONTH for chicken pox).  Just because you think everyone wants to be exposed doesn't mean they DO.  I'd love for my older children to get natural immunity, but it has to wait until it is safe for their baby sister.  Natural immunity isn't worth dying for.  If exposing your children is something you want to do, then by all means, that's your choice.  But anyone who purposely exposes their children to diseases NEEDS to be responsible about it.  Know the FACTS about the incubation period and stay in quarantine so that you don't accidentally kill another person's child...some of us depend on herd immunity because our child(ren) can't be vaccinated due to immune deficiencies.  We certainly don't want to be exposed.  So, you have the right to make the choice for YOUR family, but you don't have the right to make it for mine.  Part of exempting yourself from vaccines is being responsible about it.
 

 

Quote:
 My kids are not showing signs after being exposed after a week.  I'm still waiting......

 

The incubation period is a lot longer than 1 week.  You still could be contagious, and you still could be infecting other people unwillingly if you continue to go out in public.



 

11-16-2010 06:28 AM
AllyRae

Quote:
Originally Posted by 636Jen View Post

Ok right.  But my point is, wouldn't someone want to test the validity of the vaccine by getting exposed to chicken pox?  Does that make sense to anyone besides me?  Because, if the vaccine didn't work, wouldn't you want to know?  If you weren't immune, wouldn't you want to know before becoming an adult.....an adult that will be pregnant some day?   *shrug*  I know it's her choice.  I'm trying to find the logic in that choice from others who have made that choice.  I'm just trying to understand it.



Oh goodness, I doubt it.  I mean, NO vaccine is 100% effective.  If you get the polio vaccine for your child, I'd imagine that you wouldn't purposely expose your child to polio just to make sure the vaccine worked, would you?  I doubt in the time of smallpox that people purposely exposed their children to smallpox after being vaccinated "just to test".  I mean, she *knows* the vaccine is not 100% effective--therefore, she wants to continue to take precautions.  While chicken pox CAN be a mild illness, it's not always.  And for some families, there are medical and financial repurcussions to an illness like chicken pox. 

11-16-2010 06:20 AM
happysmileylady

Quote:
Originally Posted by 636Jen View Post

Ok right.  But my point is, wouldn't someone want to test the validity of the vaccine by getting exposed to chicken pox?  Does that make sense to anyone besides me?  Because, if the vaccine didn't work, wouldn't you want to know?  If you weren't immune, wouldn't you want to know before becoming an adult.....an adult that will be pregnant some day?   *shrug*  I know it's her choice.  I'm trying to find the logic in that choice from others who have made that choice.  I'm just trying to understand it.


My oldest never go the vax, she got the pox instead.  However, I don't go around testing her immunity by regularly exposing her to it.  Natural immunity is not 100% either.
 

11-16-2010 06:12 AM
MeepyCat

Quote:
Originally Posted by 636Jen View Post

Ok right.  But my point is, wouldn't someone want to test the validity of the vaccine by getting exposed to chicken pox?  Does that make sense to anyone besides me?  Because, if the vaccine didn't work, wouldn't you want to know?  If you weren't immune, wouldn't you want to know before becoming an adult.....an adult that will be pregnant some day?   *shrug*  I know it's her choice.  I'm trying to find the logic in that choice from others who have made that choice.  I'm just trying to understand it.


My husband has never had chicken pox.  He's had the vaccine, but it's not as effective, and chicken pox in adults is very bad.  So if our kids got chicken pox, he'd have to go stay somewhere else until they were non-contagious (or, more likely, he'd get sick too, because you're contagious before you're symptomatic), and it would be all me.  Taking care of two sick kids.  And time off work (I get six sick days a year - this would kill them all and then some).

 

Did I mention that, until quite recently, my husband was a contractor who got *no* paid sick time?  Aside from the illness itself, and the costs of whatever medical treatment he'd need, we'd be out a pretty substantial amount of money if he couldn't work for a week or two.

 

I am not interested in experiments that won't necessarily give me informative results (as this one won't - see Otto's post).  I am interested in keeping my family healthy.  No chicken pox for us, thanks.

11-16-2010 12:33 AM
Otto
Quote:
Originally Posted by 636Jen View Post

But my point is, wouldn't someone want to test the validity of the vaccine by getting exposed to chicken pox?


Just as not all exposed, unvaccinated kids contract chicken pox, such a "test" cannot demonstrate immunity. Its only "positive" outcome is actually contracting chicken pox, which is presumably what a vaccinating parent is trying to avoid in the first place. From this perspective, it's pointless.

11-15-2010 09:22 PM
636Jen

Ok right.  But my point is, wouldn't someone want to test the validity of the vaccine by getting exposed to chicken pox?  Does that make sense to anyone besides me?  Because, if the vaccine didn't work, wouldn't you want to know?  If you weren't immune, wouldn't you want to know before becoming an adult.....an adult that will be pregnant some day?   *shrug*  I know it's her choice.  I'm trying to find the logic in that choice from others who have made that choice.  I'm just trying to understand it.

11-15-2010 08:00 PM
MeepyCat

Not everyone you know wants to be exposed - your sister doesn't.  That's her call to make for her family.

11-15-2010 03:27 PM
636Jen

My thoughts on chicken pox  are that you want to get it when you're a kid and you'd want to make sure you have full immunity....especially if you plan on having kids.  Exposure could be devistating to a fetus if mom is not immune.  If you are of the opinion that vaccines aren't 100%, wouldn't you want to expose a 3 year old to make sure she's immune?  Obviously you wouldn't purposefully get into a car crash to test the safety of your car seat.  Also, being sick does suck.  If someone had the FLU, then yes stay at home and don't expose anyone.  I feel that the chicken pox are different because everyone I know WANTS to be exposed.  My parents don't care if we bring the kids around, just my sister.  I've told all the moms in our neighborhood and they are fine with it because their kids got the vaccine.  Now, if their kid ends up with chicken pox, will they thank me?  I don't know.  Probably not!  *wink*

 

My kids are not showing signs after being exposed after a week.  I'm still waiting......

11-15-2010 11:33 AM
Evergreen

Quote:
Originally Posted by 636Jen View Post

As a gesture of common courtesy , I told my family and friends that I had my 3 children exposed to chicken pox.  My mom just said, "Oh boy.  I remember when you all had them.  You'll be in for a fun week!"  My sister, who vaccinates for everything said, "Don't bring your kids anywhere near mine."  She has a 3 year old daughter.  I said, "Why not?  I thought you got Ella vaccinated already." She confirmed that then added, "Well, nothing is 100%."

 

So I guess my question is why, if she doesn't believe in what she is doing is protecting her child, would she vaccinate.  Of course, I asked her this but it's such a heated topic anyway that she simply said, "I'm just not going to get into it."  I don't tell her she's right or wrong for vaxing.  Ella isn't my child and I certainly don't have any say in how she raises her.  But I just wanted to understand the logic of it.  Even if she WAS vaccintaed, wouldn't you want to maybe expose her anyway to make sure she is in fact, immune?

 

Has anyone else run into this?  Do you just nod and smile and avoid a conflict?  How do you handle this?

 

 

Thanks.


I think that she probably knows that vaccines are not 100 percent but she has chosen to get what she feels to be the protection of the vaccine.  I would consider it a common courtesy that people I know not come around my kids if they were recently exposed to any sickness regardless of what their or my vaccine status is.

11-15-2010 10:09 AM
Emmeline II


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MeepyCat View Post

I think that nod and smile and avoid a conflict is the way to go here.

 

You say that you informed your family as a common courtesy - surely the point of this courtesy is to allow them to avoid exposure if that's what they want to do? 


True, though I think the SIL gave the situation an adversarial feel by saying "Don't bring your kids anywhere near mine", instead of "thanks for letting me know".

11-15-2010 09:14 AM
MeepyCat

I think that nod and smile and avoid a conflict is the way to go here.

 

I used to have nightmares - honest to god, wake up shaking and sweating nightmares - about my baby getting chicken pox.  It's not that it's that terrible an illness, it's that I would have had to miss so much class that I'd have had to drop out of my grad program, or so much work that I'd be fired.  I was willing to take *any* precaution to avoid it. 

 

You say that you informed your family as a common courtesy - surely the point of this courtesy is to allow them to avoid exposure if that's what they want to do? 

This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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