Nathan Key

Husband, Father, Thinker.

 

 
 

PROLOGUE

My sister-in-law found an article about vaccines the other day and posted it on Facebook. If you're into controversy, it's a great read- especially considering the rebuttal from Robert Sears and other Pediatricians.

Here's the synopsis of the article in case you don't want to read through the whole thing: Dr. Robert Sears' publication 'The Vaccine Book: Making the Right Decision for Your Child' is dangerous because in its attempt to present balanced information to parents about vaccines, more and more parents are requesting alternative Vaccine Schedules rather than the one recommended by the CDC. The result is that more and more children aren't protected against diseases that could harm them.

Here's the synopsis of Dr. Sears' response: The aim of Sears' book is to inform parents about vaccines by presenting both sides of the argument. Sears is actually Pro-vaccine and intends to persuade parents who might opt out of vaccines altogether to consider a Vaccine Schedule that isn't quite as scary as the one recommended by the CDC. If they decide to go with the slower rate instead of opting out completely, this would actually leads to greater vaccination rates, since more children would be getting vaccinated even if it's at a slightly slower rate than the recommended schedule.

* * *

MY OWN BIAS

Before I get too much further into this post, it's probably important that you know my own bias; we currently have our son Ethan on an alternative schedule- not because of Dr. Sears- but because he had a really bad reaction to his first set of vaccines and we felt that it would be better for him to receive two shots per visit rather than four. This is a different reason than most parents who opt out of vaccines or try a different schedule. Most of them are concerned about autism or heavy metal poisoning.

* * *

WHAT'S AT STAKE

When it comes to Vaccines, there are a lot of ethical dilemmas involved, (which is why this topic fits into my blog on philosophy, politics, and religion).

First, there's an issue of who gets to decide what's best for a baby. Does he get to decide, his parents, or the state? Obviously, a baby isn't in a position to make good decisions about issues that could have life and death consequences, so the issue really comes down to mom & dad versus the government.

Who is the best equipped to decide what's right for a child?

Should we allow a child's parents to decide? They surely have a vested interest in their own child's survival! On the other hand, the also lack the knowledge and understanding surrounding disease and prevention that our government has.

Should we allow the government to decide? They, of course, are looking out for the entire population- not simply one child. They mandate vaccines for the sake of the health of the entire population. On the other hand, we all know that our government is swayed by lobbying groups who throw their money into the laps of Senators and Representatives. Some of these lobbyists are companies who research and produce vaccines and since there is money to be made when parents vaccinate and money to be lost when they opt out, we can't entirely trust that either the government or vaccine manufacturers are a completely objective when it comes to how well these drugs work and whether or not they should be required for all children. It's rather naive to assume that simply because these researchers have put a lot of time and effort into testing these drugs that they aren't simply seeing dollar bill signs when a new baby is born.

* * *

QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Some parents opt out of vaccines because they believe that vaccines may cause damage to their child- are they still "child abusers" as some doctors proclaim?

2. Should parents with concerns over the recommended Vaccine Schedule be allowed to participate in alternative schedules that still provide the same vaccines to their children?

3. Ultimately who is best fit to decide what's right for a child- parents, or the government?

4. Should parents forgo the right to decide what's best for their own child since the decision to not to vaccinate could potentially effect other children as well (if their child gets sick).

 


Comments

Danielle VenHuizen

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:49:57

I think this is a very interesting topic and one that I have been thinking a lot about recently as our baby's birth is just weeks away. Personally I started out as potentially anti-vaccination, until I realized that it's only because most everyone opts "in" to vaccination that I would feel safe opting "out." If everyone chose not to vaccinate then the risks of acquiring a potentially deadly illness would be much higher. As it is the risk is only low because everyone vaccinates. That's not to say I don't believe parents still have the right to choose, because I believe they do, but it's good to remember that one's choice to opt out is predicated on everyone else participating and keeping the risk low. Just my two cents. I think in the end I'll probably choose the alternative schedule as you guys did.

 

Nathan

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:02:42

That's a good point that most anti-vaccine folks assume that their baby is safe because all the other babies have had their vaccines...

Could we consider that "using the ignorant" for our own gain?

 

Tamara Fryer

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:13:12

This is a big topic. I believe 100% parents should have the right to choose. When we had Lillie, we really struggled with to vaccinate or not to. Ultimately, we chose to vaccine her but we would not (and still don't) allow her to get more than 2 vaccines at a time. I just dont feel it is healthy, and if you are giving them so many, how can you know what they are reacting to? Now with Seth, we have done it a little different. He still gets all of his and only 2 at a time, we however did refuse the MMR. This is the one that is linked to autism, primarily in boys. I personally have seen this outcome in a friend of mine. There are just too many people out there claiming this for me to risk it. I dont feel comfortable. There were so many people refusing it, that the FFC (I think thats right) actually released a statement finally saying they would research the connection of the two. However, we never heard anything else. Once Seth is older, I may decide he is safe to then get the MMR shot, but not until he is AT LEAST 5.

 

Nathan

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:22:12

Thanks for your comment Tamara, you seem to feel pretty strongly about this.

Personally, we haven't said "No" to any vaccines, we simply have Ethan on the two shot schedule because he had a really bad reaction the one time he got all four.

I think for most parents, I'd still suggest trying the four shot schedule at first (not that I have a valid voice of authority in this matter). If there's not a major reaction to all four, I'd just keep going. But for those who see a reaction in their child, the two shot variation should be allowed, too.

In regard to autism- from everything I've read, the chances are pretty slim that autism is caused by vaccines. Then again, no one knows what autism is, so there's always a possibility. So, let's all just hope that it's NOT caused by vaccines and that someone figures out what causes it, soon!

 

Joy

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:05:00

I cannot even begin to tell you the emotional trauma I've experienced over this issue. I just wish more doctors were actually open to options, we've actually had to change pediatricians. Finally found a wonderful one, with a decent head on her shoulders about the whole issue. It's the first one I've talked to that I don't feel is just turning a blind eye to the whole thing and pushing for the recommendations no matter what.

 

Nathan

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:41:12

That's tough, Joy. I wonder if some pediatricians forget that even though they have the credentials to give recommendations, they aren't ultimately in charge of a child's health.

 

Dana

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:38:18

There is no way on this planet or any other that I would abdicate my role as parent and decision-maker to the government. Not on this issue or any other concerning my child.

Period.

 

Dana

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:38:38

There is no way on this planet or any other that I would abdicate my role as parent and decision-maker to the government. Not on this issue or any other concerning my child.

Period.

 

Tamara Fryer

Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:55:14

OK, so first of all, I meant FDA, not FCC. Such a dork! Haha.

For me the autism thing is big just because I personally know of 2 boys who have it. And 1 is Lillie's age, they were friends when we lived in GA. He actually was perfectly fine. An actually pretty smart kid. Then he got that MMR shot and it went down here extremely fast!! No one has proved that link, but for me, I have just seen too many chances to take that risk with Seth.

For me, it is only serious when Drs fuss at me because I wont let my kids get more than 2 shots at a time or when I refused just 1 shot. I have just read a whole lot on this issue....

 

Jade

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:40:23

well my son had partial of his vaccines.. and to tell you the truth.. i have refused any more. just the research and links that all these kids have are horrible. we trust our drs with our kids and some just do what we are told. i was told that i would lose my child care assistants if i refuse to give my son the rest of his shots. i have filed a philosophy exemption.. i havent heard anything back yet.. but VACCINES contain animal blood and get this... aborted fetus.. ugh.. no wonder capital hill wants to keep abortion legal

 



Leave a Reply