Immunisation

Mother' And we're not given the full story about what the possible risks and side effects are. Now, you take any drug, any over the counter drugs, and every single packet has in it a little folded up piece of paper, in very small print, but if you read them, they can actually be quite scary things. You know, you can read drugs that, this carries risk of it for thrombosis and this carries risk of this and everything, all the information is published and written on these inserts, even though you accept that most of the time, probably, the chances of that happening are is very remote. Now that is not the case with the vaccine, you are not given the package insert. You're not given detailed information to read because I really believe if we were, parents would really think a lot more seriously or take... that's maybe the' parents would, it would really give you pause for thought. And we were certainly not given information, in that order.
 

It was just an overwhelming thing of, you know, 'What are the odds of my child, you know, developing autism or a, you know, sort of stomach issue, you know, sort of some serious kind afterwards?' you know. And you, you sort of really wanted statistical evidence. And of course there wasn't, there was no, because no link had been confirmed, it was just, you know, a kind of possible link. There was no statistical evidence around. 

So you just got this massive panic without any, you know, any sort of real hard evidence one way or the other. Because you can't disprove something either until it's been, been looked into. And I think it was that whole fear of possibility without kind of any, any concrete evidence. And you really just wanted someone to sit down and say, 'All right, there's...' you know, either, you know, 'There's 100 per cent chance that there's no link whatsoever' or, 'There is a link but it's a 98 per cent chance that you know, that they'll be fine and a 2 per cent chance they'll develop autism'. And, you know, '70 per cent chance that if they don't have a vaccination they'll get German measles'. So you could at least weigh up what the, you know, what your odds were to make a decision. But there was just nothing there at all. And I think that's what was most worrying. Because if you're, if you're presented with, basically with enough facts to be able to make a decision on, you at least feel that you've done it in a kind of best-chance scenario way. Whereas you just felt you were kind of, either way you were, you know, as I, I said at the beginning, about to endanger your child's life. 

So the questions really were just based around, 'If there is a link, how high, you know, what chance is there? How many children have been vaccinated entirely safely as opposed to any possible children that may have developed effects, side effects afterwards?' I think it was based more around that, trying to establish some kind of reassurance that statistically it was likely to be fine, and not have any problems with it.
 

But actually pressurising parents, I don't think that's right, pressurising parents to have the immunisations. I think it's important to realise that parents do have that choice. If they don't want their baby to be immunised, you know, they have that choice. But you, as a health professional you should try your best to give them the information, and, and they know the consequences of not having that immunisation. I think that's really important. As I said before some health profess-, I mean professionals, they might not, they just give you the leaflet and not talk about it. But it's important for professionals to actually talk to the parents and tell them, you know, why it's important as well, and the consequences of not having these immunisations as well. I think it's really important, not just to think about all the what's it called the high level, getting the immunisations up, levels up. Because I mean you have to think of it as, you know, they're parents, you know, they're going to make their own decisions. You can't really make any decision for them or you can't really force them into something, which they're not happy about.
 

And also why they feel, why the government feels it's necessary. Like what led to them vaccinating. Because I think, I think that's one of the things also that people just kind of go, 'Well, measles was never a problem, or, you know, whatever. Why, why on earth are we all suddenly having to be vaccinated?' Because I felt like that about mumps. I was a bit, well, I had mumps, it wasn't that big a, big a deal, you know. And sort of, 'Why, you know, the re-, what led to them feeling that it was necessary to vaccinate that, against?' I think, because I think that as a parent you can see the bigger picture of, you know, and how your child's going to fit in as part of the whole, whole unit. And I think then it helps with people's sense of social responsibility. If they realise what the, you know, the possibility of if you don't have vaccinations, it's much, you know, you're much more likely to kind of go through with having it done probably.

And it's worth kind of, you know, making that point, not in a kind of bullying way, but just that realistically statistically this is the reality of the situation here. And the situation if you don't, you know, if a certain percentage don't have it done, that, you know, that there are, there is a reason why. It's not kind of done, done to annoy people, which, you know, the press around, it's been so bad lately that it's just kind of just like the government saying, 'You've got to have this done' and, and, you know, creating a system which is in GPs' surgeries that will basically make it impossible for people not to do it. Whereas I think if you just said to people on a reasonable basis, 'This is why it's being done'. And I don't remember ever reading anything that just went through kind of what the steps were leading to them doing the triple jab, and why they, you know, they made those decisions and what the implications were for it.