Compromising with wife

[Xantippe]

Xantippe, I highly doubt HoosierDaddy has an issue with calmly discussing the pros and cons of each side in this question. The issue is that instead of calmly and rationally presenting the arguments for vaccines you are using emotion-laden rhetoric to both bludgeon and scare people into getting them.

What’s the nice way to say, “Your going against medical advice and not vaccinating your child could put someone else’s child in the hospital?”

 

[bitterhope]

It is one thing to talk truthfully about the dangers of not vaccinating, but to try to scare people into your way of thinking turns most people off. No progress will be made that way. No compromise can be reached if both sides stomp their feet and toss threats and fear at each other. There is enough information out there to make an informed decision and an individual decision. If a child is vaccinated and we are to trust that the vaccine actually offer the protection we are told they do then it should not really matter to you, me or anyone else that another parent chooses not to vaccinate. Yes, infants are most at risk before their vaccines are given, but that is also when the vaccines are most likely to cause a problem as well. Both sides have legitimate concerns, but harping on fear only causes people to become suspicious of your cause.

As many times as vaccine have been recalled for one reason or another I understand how people are suspicious and some believe the link to autism. I don’t, but I do see how a parent might find that as believable. I know some did post about these beliefs. Some of us posted about our experiences of bad reactions. These were actual first hand experiences of parents that experienced either bad reactions or concerns that they caused a problem for their kids. And you know, most if us still vaccinate our kids even afterwards. We didn’t post horrible home videos of what our children or, even worse, other people’s children went through trying to dissuade someone from vaccinating their kids. Trust me, the son that had encephalitis was in as bad a place as the videos you posted and has life long problems to deal with. I could probably make an emotional before and after video and scare a lot of people out of vaccines, but all that would do is fuel contempt. I still find vaccines to make more sense but have no doubt that my son would have faired better from catching measles naturally at a later date (he was a 5% sized 15 month old) than he did from the shot. Not you or anyone else has posted actual first hand experience dealing with these diseases. I know they happen. I vaccinate so it’s less likely to happen. But trying to scare people with emotional videos into agreeing with you just turns people off and causes suspicion.

 

[pensmama87]

What’s the nice way to say, “Your going against medical advice and not vaccinating your child could put someone else’s child in the hospital?”

Xantippe has a history on these forums of being an incredibly reasonable poster who keeps her head on straight. Her posts do not strike me as inflammatory, and honestly, she is one of the last people on CAF I would expect to post that way regardless of the issue.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Xantippe, I highly doubt HoosierDaddy has an issue with calmly discussing the pros and cons of each side in this question. The issue is that instead of calmly and rationally presenting the arguments for vaccines you are using emotion-laden rhetoric to both bludgeon and scare people into getting them.

Exactly and I am pro vaccination.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

What’s the nice way to say, “Your going against medical advice and not vaccinating your child could put someone else’s child in the hospital?”

Oh geesh!

There you go again…

Why is this so emotional for you?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Xantippe has a history on these forums of being an incredibly reasonable poster who keeps her head on straight. Her posts do not strike me as inflammatory, and honestly, she is one of the last people on CAF I would expect to post that way regardless of the issue.

I agree in general. And she has used logic and fact based explanations on a myriad of subjects that I respect. Which is why this one stands out as odd.

 

[Xantippe]

It is one thing to talk truthfully about the dangers of not vaccinating, but to try to scare people into your way of thinking turns most people off.
No progress will be made that way. No compromise can be reached if both sides stomp their feet and toss threats and fear at each other. There is enough information out there to make an informed decision and an individual decision. If a child is vaccinated and we are to trust that the vaccine actually offer the protection we are told they do then it should not really matter to you, me or anyone else that another parent chooses not to vaccinate.
Yes, infants are most at risk before their vaccines are given, but that is also when the vaccines are most likely to cause a problem as well. Both sides have legitimate concerns, but harping on fear only causes people to become suspicious of your cause.

As many times as vaccine have been recalled for one reason or another I understand how people are suspicious and some believe the link to autism. I don’t, but I do see how a parent might find that as believable. I know some did post about these beliefs. Some of us posted about our experiences of bad reactions. These were actual first hand experiences of parents that experienced either bad reactions or concerns that they caused a problem for their kids. And you know, most if us still vaccinate our kids even afterwards. We didn’t post horrible home videos of what our children or, even worse, other people’s children went through trying to dissuade someone from vaccinating their kids. Trust me, the son that had encephalitis was in as bad a place as the videos you posted and has life long problems to deal with. I could probably make an emotional before and after video and scare a lot of people out of vaccines, but all that would do is fuel contempt. I still find vaccines to make more sense but have no doubt that my son would have faired better from catching measles naturally at a later date (he was a 5% sized 15 month old) than he did from the shot. Not you or anyone else has posted actual first hand experience dealing with these diseases. I know they happen. I vaccinate so it’s less likely to happen. But trying to scare people with emotional videos into agreeing with you just turns people off and causes suspicion.

I did post my first-hand experience with rotavirus. You’ll find it upthread. I had a 3.5 year old who got it at preschool and she was so dehydrated that she had to be on an IV in ER for several hours. And then when her baby brother (10 or 11 months old) got the rotavirus soon after, he was so dehydrated (being a smaller child) that he had to spend the night in the hospital being rehydrated on an IV.

Coincidentally, all of this happened the very year that the rotavirus vaccine was first approved in the US–my kids just missed getting the vaccine in time.

I posted at length on rotavirus earlier, but very briefly, rotavirus and other diarrheal illnesses are a leading killer of small children around the world, particularly in developing countries.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotavirus

 

[Xantippe]

Come to think of it, I have a happy vaccine success story.

Several months ago, my husband came down with chicken pox at 41. He had never been vaccinated and apparently never had it. He had a nasty case of it and suffered a lot.

Here’s the happy part–all three of our kids are vaccinated against chickenpox and NONE of them got chickenpox from their daddy. It was great! (I’d had it before and didn’t get it, either.)

 

[Xantippe]

Hoosier daddy and bitterhope,

Here’s one important reason why I don’t feel like one can take the Kumbaya approach to vaccines and vaccine refusal.

When a parent goes against the medical judgment of their pediatrician, the American Pediatric Association, and whatever percentage of practicing pediatricians, they’d better be darn sure what they are doing. In that situation, the default position is to go with medical advice, and going against medical advice should require a very, very high level of certainty. If we go with doctor’s advice, if he’s wrong, that’s his fault (he’s the MD after all), but if we go “against medical advice” for something that’s well established as medical practice, then yes, we do bear a high level of responsibility for any adverse outcomes to our children or other people’s children. Medical care is not a Chinese restaurant–we can’t just choose one from column A and one from column B and expect good outcomes.

(And for those who believe that there’s some sort of vast conspiracy to promote vaccines–it would have to include pediatricians. Why would people who have taken a substantial paycut to practice pediatric medicine as opposed to more lucrative specialties, who have studied the particular medical issues of children for years and who generally love children and who often have kids themselves that they vaccinate purposely harm children with dangerous vaccines? That’s nuts.)

This is not to say that there may not be occasions when going against medical advice is wise. But the level of evidence needed needs to be higher than the level of evidence needed for following medical advice. It isn’t a 50/50 split where either move is automatically just as respectable.

(To give an example of not going with medical advice, yesterday we were at a podiatrist’s office for a first appointment for a severe condition that may require some cutting. While we were waiting in the lobby, there was a video running for a laser pain treatment. I found it a little quackish. My husband looked up laser pain treatment on his phone in the waiting room and saw that it’s mentioned as a fake therapy that works as a placebo–nobody has any explanation of why it works and the effects (if any) disappear with time. So, we picked up and left the office, despite the fairly dire need, not knowing if we’d be able to get an appointment elsewhere, and made an appointment with somebody else. But we’re not doing home foot surgery–we’re going to a different doctor and we’ll almost certainly follow his advice.)

 

[pensmama87]

I agree in general. And she has used logic and fact based explanations on a myriad of subjects that I respect. Which is why this one stands out as odd.

I respectfully submit that your position on the issue may be leading you to read things into her posts that aren’t there.

 

[PaulGH]

1. The scare tactics make the case for vaccinations look weaker. Like some sort of play of emotions (fear) is needed to make the choice to vaccinate. It damages the credibility of your position.
2. If I vaccinated my children or not or if Suzie Q next door does or not, does not mean anyone is going to walk around crippled. Overstating the case means you have a weak case. And think about it? Why is the video you cited made? Why are the mommy blogs full of more vitriol than the mob on this issue? Why so much scare tactics? Why do people live and die on this hill? What is the driving motivation?

At the risk of repeating what I said earlier in the thread, I’ll mention that I’m with Hoosier Daddy on this. As someone who has been on the fence about vaccines, and who really wants to do what is best for my kids, I have found that when a person uses heavy-handed scare tactics regarding vaccines (which I have heard from both sides), I am less likely to be convinced of the person’s point of view. This is why I found the whole vaccine debate so frustrating (not here on this thread, but in general). If you are already in one camp or the other, you can cheer on the apologists for your side, and belittle the views of the other side. But if you are on the fence, trying to figure out what is the right thing to do, it can be difficult to find good information that is not mixed with heavy-handed polemics.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I respectfully submit that your position on the issue may be leading you to read things into her posts that aren’t there.

What is my position? Logic and understanding?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Hoosier daddy and bitterhope,

Here’s one important reason why I don’t feel like one can take the Kumbaya approach to vaccines and vaccine refusal.

When a parent goes against the medical judgment of their pediatrician, the American Pediatric Association, and whatever percentage of practicing pediatricians, they’d better be darn sure what they are doing. In that situation, the default position is to go with medical advice, and going against medical advice should require a very, very high level of certainty. If we go with doctor’s advice, if he’s wrong, that’s his fault (he’s the MD after all), but if we go “against medical advice” for something that’s well established as medical practice, then yes, we do bear a high level of responsibility for any adverse outcomes to our children or other people’s children. Medical care is not a Chinese restaurant–we can’t just choose one from column A and one from column B and expect good outcomes.

(And for those who believe that there’s some sort of vast conspiracy to promote vaccines–it would have to include pediatricians. Why would people who have taken a substantial paycut to practice pediatric medicine as opposed to more lucrative specialties, who have studied the particular medical issues of children for years and who generally love children and who often have kids themselves that they vaccinate purposely harm children with dangerous vaccines? That’s nuts.)

This is not to say that there may not be occasions when going against medical advice is wise. But the level of evidence needed needs to be higher than the level of evidence needed for following medical advice. It isn’t a 50/50 split where either move is automatically just as respectable.

(To give an example of not going with medical advice, yesterday we were at a podiatrist’s office for a first appointment for a severe condition that may require some cutting. While we were waiting in the lobby, there was a video running for a laser pain treatment. I found it a little quackish. My husband looked up laser pain treatment on his phone in the waiting room and saw that it’s mentioned as a fake therapy that works as a placebo–nobody has any explanation of why it works and the effects (if any) disappear with time. So, we picked up and left the office, despite the fairly dire need, not knowing if we’d be able to get an appointment elsewhere, and made an appointment with somebody else. But we’re not doing home foot surgery–we’re going to a different doctor and we’ll almost certainly follow his advice.)

It just seems weird that this is your flag. And there is much emotion in it. We have been part of NFP threads where you are way less sensationalist about something I think is a bigger issue. But if this is your thing, if this is your cause. I understand. It is noticeably different though in how you are approaching it. And I agree with a lot you say. Like I mentioned we vaccinate. But I will also tell you that as a logical parent, your tactics don’t scare me but rather make me question your very premise.

Again, it would be nice if you had this kind of passion on some other threads where I could have used your help.

Usually I stay away from such threads as modesty, or immunizing or breastfeeding because for some reason women treat these issues like men treat sports. It turns into quite the debate about a side.

But I am curious about all this emotion about something that I don’t see as a “side”.

There would be less debate on a thread if I said I was taking my child hunting this weekend. And that involves a kid and a loaded gun.

What is the Church’s position on Vaccinations. Has She spoken about them specifically?
Has the church spoken about this?

 

[pensmama87]

What is my position? Logic and understanding?

Your posts are coming across to me as defensive. A poster mentioned once that there are real risks posed by the childhood diseases that now have vaccines available, and gave an example, and she had three (IIRC) people jump on her for using “scare tactics.” She also mentioned that in her opinion there were completely valid reasons not to vaccinate and agreed with several posters reasoning about why they didn’t.

I just don’t see the “scare tactics.” Strong opinion, maybe, but I don’t think she’s trying to bully people. We have lots of that on the boards already.

 

[agnes_therese]

So if the OP’s wife is genuinely, sincerely concerned that something like this would happen to her child, how is that a conspiracy theory? It only counts AFTER your child is damaged? That’s unfair. Why can’t she have an opinion on what’s safe and what isn’t?

Another of our choices was to not vax our younger against rotavirus. All the above stats on the virus are completely true- it’s a rough virus and one you don’t want your baby to get. However, between myself and my ped, we agreed that my baby didn’t need it. Why? He was exclusively breast fed = stronger immunity. He was completely home with me and no day care setting, his older brother was not in preschool = not in a high risk transmission group. So, we opted not to vax him. It was our choice to not do it since it is a recommended vaccine rather than a required one. That doesn’t make me a conspiracy theorist, it makes me a well informed, thoughtful mother.

But I wasn’t responding to the OP, I was responding to another poster, who had a completely different situation. I have not called the OP’s wife a conspiracy theorist, so please be more careful with your accusations.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Another point is this. We make decisions for our children every day. And those decisions are made out of love, what we believe and hopefully our faith. People who do not vaccinate are not lazy, they are doing something they believe is best for their child. Just as I am when I vaccinate. And I am not sure of my decision. That is why I don’t fight it hard one way or the other, I would never tell a someone that I have such faith in medicine and science that this is a no brainier decision. Not with the track history of our government, and even medicine.

My middle daughter, the one with the health problems, was on Reglan. Which is a very scary drug. We had to make the decision to put her on it weighing the risks vs the potential rewards. I would not call another parent stupid for making a different decision.

Lastly, we work with GMO foods. Now, of course I don’t bite the hand that feeds me. And we eat GMO foods. (I’m sure you all do too) But I don’t look down upon those who choose not to. I can point to science and data and approvals and the fact that 98 percent of the nation does it and that it can be used to make food “healthier” But if you want to focus on the fact that it can indeed change your DNA, (it can) and want to go a different rout. Or if you say to me that the FDA will approve anything and no one knows what happens 20 years from now to people, or 3 generations now for people. Ok, I see your point. But is one person stupid and the other right? Nope.

I think some people are upset because not all of us CAN make the decision not to vaccinate. Because that would lead to diseases making a comeback. But I don’t begrudge a few that choice. And scare tactics have been employed about how the movement would not last (because people could not stomach deaths) But here is a far more logical and businesslike solution. The movement would not last because those who make the vaccines would make a safer, and more effective one. When it starts affecting profits then you will see the information out there about how perhaps mercury (that is not used anymore) was the problem. Or perhaps they will move away from drawing lines of a vaccine from a historical abortion.

I used to think like the OP about all of it. About science about hippies and about those who made different decisions than I did. And I used to live in a heavy hippie area. Then I moved to the midwest where pollution and industry reign. And the farther east of the Mississippi I got, the greener I became. And one thing that scares me is anytime everybody lines up for something and the people who question it are maligned, scared and told that they are stupid. That is downright scary to me. And if you ask me it is a disease in and of itself. And it would seem that most are not vaccinated for it.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Your posts are coming across to me as defensive. A poster mentioned once that there are real risks posed by the childhood diseases that now have vaccines available, and gave an example, and she had three (IIRC) people jump on her for using “scare tactics.” She also mentioned that in her opinion there were completely valid reasons not to vaccinate and agreed with several posters reasoning about why they didn’t.

I just don’t see the “scare tactics.” Strong opinion, maybe, but I don’t think she’s trying to bully people. We have lots of that on the boards already.

I’m glad you stand in solidarity with your sister. Did you watch the video?

I would not say she is bullying.

She most definitely is trying to make an emotional point using sensationalist videos and language. Designed to scare, not inform. I have seen her argue with the best of them on the boards, defending her position with clarity and logic. Almost to a point that I wish she would get mad, get emotional about something. I also know that her posts on the boards are very very wise.

There would be more debate about using an emotional video or pictures about an issue such as abortion. Which is odd, because I have no problem with such images when used to defend the life position. I admit I have not figured out why one struck me as persuasive and the other (this one) struck me as pushing me farther from the person’s position than I was originally. Not based on facts, but on the good sense of knowing that rarely is such a play on emotion ever dictated by facts.

My position is that people are not stupid for not vaccinating and it is a valid choice.

It is interesting that you see my posts as defensive. What position am I defending?

 

[pensmama87]

Hoosier daddy and bitterhope,

Here’s one important reason why I don’t feel like one can take the Kumbaya approach to vaccines and vaccine refusal.

When a parent goes against the medical judgment of their pediatrician, the American Pediatric Association, and whatever percentage of practicing pediatricians, they’d better be darn sure what they are doing. In that situation, the default position is to go with medical advice, and going against medical advice should require a very, very high level of certainty. If we go with doctor’s advice, if he’s wrong, that’s his fault (he’s the MD after all), but if we go “against medical advice” for something that’s well established as medical practice, then yes, we do bear a high level of responsibility for any adverse outcomes to our children or other people’s children. Medical care is not a Chinese restaurant–we can’t just choose one from column A and one from column B and expect good outcomes.

(And for those who believe that there’s some sort of vast conspiracy to promote vaccines–it would have to include pediatricians. Why would people who have taken a substantial paycut to practice pediatric medicine as opposed to more lucrative specialties, who have studied the particular medical issues of children for years and who generally love children and who often have kids themselves that they vaccinate purposely harm children with dangerous vaccines? That’s nuts.)

This is not to say that there may not be occasions when going against medical advice is wise. But the level of evidence needed needs to be higher than the level of evidence needed for following medical advice. It isn’t a 50/50 split where either move is automatically just as respectable.

(To give an example of not going with medical advice, yesterday we were at a podiatrist’s office for a first appointment for a severe condition that may require some cutting. While we were waiting in the lobby, there was a video running for a laser pain treatment. I found it a little quackish. My husband looked up laser pain treatment on his phone in the waiting room and saw that it’s mentioned as a fake therapy that works as a placebo–nobody has any explanation of why it works and the effects (if any) disappear with time. So, we picked up and left the office, despite the fairly dire need, not knowing if we’d be able to get an appointment elsewhere, and made an appointment with somebody else. But we’re not doing home foot surgery–we’re going to a different doctor and we’ll almost certainly follow his advice.)

I agree with this, and I have had some pretty strong disagreements with medical professionals, including our pediatrician. In that case, it was over a vaccine issue - in our case it was the aborted fetal cell lines. He thought it was a myth, but was willing to listen (major points for him!) I showed him the research that said otherwise, he said, “OK, we’ll use the alternatives when available, but here’s why I want you to get the regular for MMR even though there isn’t an alternative - measles are back and it’s a serious disease.” If measles weren’t around where we live, I probably would have said “No thanks.” But I feel like I can actually talk to him and he’ll listen to me and understand where I’m coming from even when he thinks I’m wrong.

I think a lot of this comes down to the relationship people have with the doctors and other medical professionals who care for them. There are some doctors, even highly compassionate ones, who can be really arrogant and rude to patients. That makes it really hard to accept their advice, and once they’ve told you one thing that’s wrong everything gets questioned. There are lots of doctors who still give out antiquated advice and recommend wrong treatments. They make it hard on us to know what we should do.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

(To give an example of not going with medical advice, yesterday we were at a podiatrist’s office for a first appointment for a severe condition that may require some cutting. While we were waiting in the lobby, there was a video running for a laser pain treatment. I found it a little quackish. My husband looked up laser pain treatment on his phone in the waiting room and saw that it’s mentioned as a fake therapy that works as a placebo–nobody has any explanation of why it works and the effects (if any) disappear with time. So, we picked up and left the office, despite the fairly dire need, not knowing if we’d be able to get an appointment elsewhere, and made an appointment with somebody else. But we’re not doing home foot surgery–we’re going to a different doctor and we’ll almost certainly follow his advice.)

Wait! So you were at a real PHD’s office, you saw something, you googled it, and decided against it because of something you read on the internet?

AND YOU VACCINATE!!!


Ol Pedro (who is apparently just being entertained by all of us now) is just leaning back, with his feet on his desk and putting you in the same camp as his wife.

 

[pensmama87]

I’m glad you stand in solidarity with your sister. Did you watch the video?

I would not say she is bullying.

It is interesting that you see my posts as defensive. What position am I defending?

From your first post on the thread (#24) and others, I got the impression that you do not vaccinate according to the mainstream guidelines. Perhaps I am misled.

I didn’t watch the video and don’t care to (frankly today do not have the time - video requires little children be sleeping )

My position, summed up, is this: What is the greater risk - the risk posed by the vaccine or the risk posed by contracting the disease? Do the less risky thing. For the vast majority of people, IMO, the risk posed by contracting the disease is a lot greater. For those who can’t be vaccinated (the very young, immune-compromised, allergic reaction, what have you), the rest of us who are help provide protection from that disease.

I do think doctors could do a better job being upfront about potential risks - not just of vaccines but of everything. There is a tendency, IMO, in medicine to downplay the medical risks of procedures and medications that doctors deal with everyday, because to them they are ordinary, and to hype the risks of doing nothing/letting nature take its course (they lose control then.) I’ve seen this at play in my care and the care for my children, especially regarding pregnancy and childbirth. I get why that happens, but I don’t think it necessarily does patients favors. (Like when I was giving birth to my first and anesthesiologist told me there were “no risks” to an epidural. False, false, false! Now, I had it and it was fine, as it would be in most cases, and I would have no problem with him saying, “This can happen, but the risk is this percent and because you are a, b, c, we think you are a good candidate for it” but that’s not the same as, “I do this every day so it’s safe.”)