This is all assuming that vaccines cause no harm. Because you would be doing just that.......... Assuming
16
@Slightlyamused
No. The data shows vaccines cause no harm to the vast, vast majority of kids and adults. It isn't an assumption if evidence backs it up.
149
@AD
There are no studies with placebos because that would involve giving a child a placebo, instead of a vaccine - exposing them to polio, measles, mumps, diphtheria, and increasing the likelihood and severity of influenza infection.
104
@ At least once there were trials involving children. The first polio vaccine was administered to volunteer NYC schoolchildren in around 1956. I was a participant, as was my best friend, Diane. The following summer, my parents received a letter that I had received a placebo and was to be scheduled for the administration of the actual vaccine that fall. I also received a card identifying me as a "Polio Pioneer," which I still have. Diane received the "real thing" and was jubilant she didn't have to take a second shot.
51
Took me a very long time to stop contact in all ways from my 2 brothers.
We all are near 70.
The elder is still a raging angry alcoholic that ruined every holiday family gathering since he was 16. He got the 'cure' at least 3 times. Still drunk.
The younger and his wife are potheads that will not stop either. Their now 30's son is autistic. Who knows why. There was another 2 generations earlier. My problem with this brother is, the smart kid graduated HS easily with an aid by his side. The day the big young msn graduated I tried and tried for years to get them to enroll him in vocational training at the local college he could bicycle to. The stoners put it off. Next year...His mother has passed. I was told do not come to the funeral. I did not.
So I gave up, moved far away, and have not made one attempt to contact any of them. Nor have they reached out.
A middle child has to know his limitations.
Peace
10
Find out of your mother had measles as a child. If so, she is immune-end of problem.
10
@Rosco2 Not necessarily. Depending on how long ago Grandma had the measles she may require a booster, which would likely not be recommended if she is immunocompromised. No visits for the grands is the only responsible alternative if Mom won’t budge.
42
Maribeth. Having actually had a case of measles gives a person lifetime immunity to the disease. This is the one concrete advantage of contracting these diseases - the lifetime immunity. If grandma's immune system is compromised she can have a blood titer test done to see if she has immunity to measles, mumps or rubella. This would be a better course of action than mindlessly getting vaccinated against a disease she's likely already immune to, especially since her immune system is weak.
Vaccines are reasonably safe but they are not completely safe. The MMR vaccine is not without side effects, some potentially life changing. A certain number of people who get the MMR vaccine will develop encephalitis even though the number is much lower than the number of people who develop encephalitis from the disease.
Grandma probably should have a titer test done to see if she has immunity. It would save the whole family a great deal of needless angst to know that she is safe.
15
@Rosco2
And mumps, and rubella, and chicken pox...
And this year's strain of influenza, and pneumococcal pneumonia...
9
As a mother of a vaccine injured child and vaccine injured myself I implore you to actually research vaccine safety and ingredients. Not only do they incorporate proven neurotoxic chemicals but they also include human dna that has been proven to be carcinogenic. All of this is easily discussed by professionals on “The Highwire” as well as all of the references to the studies. Children that have a family history of autoimmune diseases are at an increased risk for vaccine injury. Lastly, they aren’t your children so mind your own business and let their parents make their own choices!
9
@CEG Anosognosia is treatable.
19
@CEG
I agree that its her choice, but in no way should those kids be around their immuno-compromised grandmother if they aren't vaccinated. Her freedom to make her own choices end when they threaten the lives of their loved ones. She's free to make her own choices, but those choices have consequences including losing her free childcare from her mother and sister.
58
If it only affected your own children we would “mind our own business.” But it affects the populace so your individual choice to not vaccinate is dangerous for many people. Once your rights interfere with others’ rights, that’s what happens.
61
I am a retired licensed Naturopathic Physician with three children in their 30's. I chose to carefully select the IPV (inactivated polio vaccine) in lieu of the OPV ( live oral polio vaccine) and the DT (diphtheria/tetanus) injections. I felt then and still do that the safest vaccines are DEAD ones, not live.
My children grew up with excellent health which they carry into their adulthood. When asked by them, I have counseled them and directed them to do their own research whether to be vaccinated with the MMR and others, but that is their decision to make. In fact, they are at much lower risk for adverse reactions now that their immune systems are well developed. Before my recent trip to Mexico I got my 10 year renewal of my DT (diphtheria/tetanus) shot.
When I provided the IPV to my children the OPV was the vaccine of choice and I had to order it specially and the pharmacist told me I was crazy. Not many years later, the OPV was replaced by the IPV in the US because the OPV was the sole cause of Polio in the US. I have met children who have been damaged by vaccines and it is heart wrenching. Vaccines are not without risk and it seems to me that the more times we inject live pathogens through our greatest defense against disease (the skin with which we are covered) the risk rises for side effects. Vaccines are not perfect and have a failure rate and most are not permanent. I am not an anti vaxer , but believe in vaccinating with with care. Life is a dice roll.
19
@robcagen
Sure. But some things are proven to be vastly effective, and a major advancement in the overall health of the general population, and vaccines are one of these things. Your comment is tantamount to saying that death/injury from being struck by lightening is horrific, while not mentioning that your chances of being struck by lightening are very, very small. On the list of "modern" advances that have affected mortality, vaccines rank way at the top.
111
@Matthew
My feelings about vaccines are these: Statistically, the likelihood that a vaccine will have a catastrophic effect is negligible, thus, "they are safe".
But if you are the person who has a genetic predisposition to have issues with your immune system, ie diabetes, or lupus or the such, then the damage might be more subtle—take longer to reveal itself.
So sure, for the mass herd immunity, it's a means to an end, and one I support.
But for the individual, it's a 100% risk if you come from a family with diabetes, autism, LDs, lupus, etc. That's my kin. So in that situation, though I advocate vaccinating, I advocate slowing down the schedule and staggering the live vaccines. All by the age of 4.
11
you claim that you have met children damaged by vaccines. based on what information do you know that to be true.
you may not be an anti vaxxer, but your note seems to walk and quack like a duck.
93
Off the top, I'm horrifed at the idea that you would even contemplate this! There is a lot of fear-mongering afoot vis-a-vis measles. I suggest that EVERYONE read the MMR monograph before even contemplating an MMR shot. GSK monograph here: https://bit.ly/2K9U0oD. Merck's here: bit.ly/2Gpte9i Educate before you vaccinate! We must always know the risks before we jump in!
4
@Janet McN
The point is that education leads to vaccination.
11
Hello there! I think the first measure of your relief from uneasiness towards your sister kids is to educate yourself. Your mother and whomever is around will be a lot more at risk if the kids get vaccinated, especially for the measles, mumps and rubella. The vaccine is a live virus and it sheds, according to the insert, for 28 days (https://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf - page 5, 3rd paragraph). Unvaccinated are not carriers of disease or vectors like the media try to convince you. If the children are vaccinated your mother will then be exposed to the disease. Not to mention that people have choice over their bodies and their children's bodies and this is a human right. Please, educate yourself instead of trying to divide the family.
7
Bottom line folks.....my body my choice!!! All you who choose to smoke, eat garbage food till you’re obese, eat pain meds like candy....you ALL affect my life negatively whether breathing your smoke or doctors so overwhelmed by your health problems that it’s impossible to get in. I’d like to force you all into treatment or onto a treadmill, but it’s not my place. I don’t receive vaccinations and am never sick, but you assume I am just because of my choice. Instead I support my powerful immune system through smart lifestyle choices and it’s worked great for 60 years now. We’re very quickly loosing all our health freedoms and it’s because of people like you.
7
@2mnywhippets
Yes, it is your choice. But do consider this: even healthy, you are still able to carry diseases that will kill others, from new-born babies to someone like me, with a compromised immune system. So your decision does affect others negatively. And I'm glad to hear you are healthy and take care of yourself--would you not consider you are healthy enough to handle vaccination as well? A healthy adult should have no problem, and it could mean all the difference to someone else. To me, that seems like a pretty reasonable choice.
As to access to treatment and freedom of choice, well, I don't know, there is also our large, aging population that is living longer and needing more medical care, but if I had to point fingers I'd say any constraint you are feeling is as much a function of the profit-driven medical industry as anything.
I agree though that others shouldn't be able to make that choice for you--although, ironically anti-smokers (which it sounds like you are one of) fought and won to get smoking banned in many places because it benefited the larger population. Something to think about...
71
@2mnywhippets
Denial of science and medicine is similar to climate change denial. Dangerous to the entire population. Only very selfish uninformed people act like they have no obligations to the world around them!
35
@2mnywhippets Sorry to tell you but even people but even people who work out, exercise and eat a healthful diet get sicknesses like cancer, even people like you with your holier than thou attitude. By the way, if you’re so healthy, why do you need to visit the doctors whom you claim you can’t get in to see?
29
Sometimes the government is simply wrong. Like when they postponed informing the public about the dangers of cigarette smoking for decades.
Also it really needs to be pointed out that the CDC has paid out over three billion dollars to parents of kids whose health has been harmed by vaccinations. Vaccinations could not exist without laws that make it impossible to sue the manufactures for damages.
There is much to consider.
12
Where did you get this information about the CDC?
12
@Allan
You say "Also it really needs to be pointed out that the CDC has paid out over three billion dollars to parents of kids whose health has been harmed by vaccinations."
This sounds like you, or some other antivaxxer, just made this up.. Please post citations that document statements like this when you write such things. People tend to believe what they read so you have a moral obligation to be clear and honest in what you say. I will think that what you wrote is mischievous nonsense unless you can document it.
30
@Allan
Actually, the Surgeon General's 1954 report that cigarettes caused lung cancer was the "smoking gun" that allowed the anti-smoking efforts to get started.
The asbestos manufacturers were even worse = they knew as far back as 1911 that asbestos exposure cause mesothelioma, which is always fatal, and did nothing until there were wrongful death lawsuits staring in the 1970s.
15
Sadly, the kids and their family dynamic will have to pay the price for parental obstinancy.
Shut down all baby-sitting until every child is caught up on their vaccinations. This includes any older kids not usually need at grandma's.
16
LW2: what kind of a question is that?
"Do I have an obligation to help a person I do not know, who may or may not need help?"
Why not just write, "I want to help this person, as unreasonable as that is. Please help me argue that I have an ethical responsibility to do it, in order to camouflage my neurosis."
If the mother has had measles as a child, there is no problem, is there?
Apart from that, There is no way to mandate vaccination upon the sister's kids, not even for the state..
Universal Declaration on Bio-ethics and Human Rights
Article 6 – Consent
1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.
Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
19 October 2005 UNESCO
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
2
Re the mystic healer who is being pursued by the CIA: contact the US Embassy in the country she's in and give him as much ino as you can to help them locate her. They will likely send a consular officer to check on her. But if she doesn't want their help they cannot force her to accept it.
6
Deusions expressed by a stranger dont require a response, unless they also present evidence of risk to others. The obligation to prevent harm to the deluded person or others, must be weighed against the possibility that an intervention may, itself cause harm, by disrupting relationships or poking paranoid hostility. The mother, who fears vaccines is not going to be convinced by discussion, logic or consequences. Her sister and the children’s grandmother could limit exposure during known outbreaks in their area, accepting a small continue risk. Or they could cut It it off entirely, ensuring a severe schism in th family. The decision is entirely up to th grandmother. Online delusions in a stranger, are entirely different though. Again, the chance of changing the delusion is essentially zero, but intervening would almost certainly result in on-line hostility. The writer could post a cautionary response, in hopes of dissuading others from endorseing the delusions. But should resist being drawn into a hopeless series of debates.
In neither case, should the concerned and caring intervener give in to the temptation to denigrate or scorn the delusions or their proponents.
4
Re LW1: You have no right to have your nieces and/or nephews vaccinated without the permission of one of their parents. Only the state could vaccinate them against their parents wishes. What you can do and MUST do is curtail ALL babysitting until ALL the children are properly vaccinated. Your primary responsibility is to your mother, NOT your sister and her children.
33
@Doug
Unless the grandmother is herself incompetent, it is she, who must measure the risk of exposure, versus the risk of losing the love and relationship with her daughter and grandchildren. Sometimes, we all accept errors by loved ones, which would be completely Inacceptable from others. Preserving familial integrity isn’t a commitment to be lightly discarded, even when forced to confront irrational and reckless behavior by other members.
1
It’s truly frightening to read the posts here from anti-vaxxers; in reality they are pro-plaguers. I can see that many of them will will never be convinced otherwise, and they endanger the populace.
39
I am unsatisfied by the presumption that what is legal is ethical.
What is the cost of protecting these children and the rest of society by vaccinating them against their mother's will? An assault charge? Assuming that a jury would even convict, I suspect that most judges would give the absolute minimum sentence.
Sabotaging the relationship with her sister? That is what is essentially being proposed and she is merely haggling over the price."
7
I would not put my mother at risk. Sorry. Vaccinate the children or find another place for care. Otherwise the anti-Vaxxer continues unimpeded while she is parasitically being enabled by the immune hoard and she’s being enabled by her own family and they are really and scientifically at risk.
41
@Sam Cheever and make the ultimatum immediately.
10
@Sam Cheever, totally agree. Action proves your conviction that the sister is putting the writer and mother at risk and borders on criminal behavior. Also she should recommend her sister to a good health professional from an accredited university to explain her folly and a mental health professional. She obviously needs professional help with the phobia /psychosis that is impeding rational thinking.
7
One other thing the writer of the first letter ought to consider: There is a small, but not miniscule, chance that one of the children will develop autism - I believe 1 in 60 that is diagnosed with it? If that should happen after you vacccinate the children, even though it may be in no way related to the vaccine, you will never convince your sister that you did not cause this.
3
Vaccines DO NOT cause autism. Period.
24
@NativeNYer4Ever, both the aricle and I are pretty clear about that. But some people do not believe that, and if one of those kids is diagnosed as autistic after being vaccinated, the mother will never be convinced it wasn’t caused by the vaccine.
11
No vaccine = No babysitting. It’s that simple. The mom can then decide what she wants to do. Putting your mother and other people at risk is borderline criminal.
49
Sadly, OP1 can't immunize the children behind their mother's back, but where is their father? Does he share their mother's beliefs? I believe that the OP and her mother should refuse to watch the children anymore until they are vaccinated. Perhaps the sister might give a hoot about her mother's health and safety if free babysitting is taken off the table.
26
Kwame is correct: most anti-vaxxers are free riders who get the benefit from a high vaccination rate without getting their kids vaccinated. Here we have "double free ride"; free ride from the society and from her at-risk mom. I cannot say I would never let the children see their gramma but I would sure restrict it. It is startling that a mother would do that to her own mother. But gee, you can't get her kids vaccinated without the consent of their mom.
24
@John actually it’s the other way around. The general population is lucky to have people like me who actually had the wild childhood viruses and now have lifelong immunity. The vaccinated are deceptive as they can be vaccine failures, have waning antibodies, be asymptomatic carriers or shed if recently vaccinated. I’m also curious to know how the grandmother protects from the people carrying thousands of other pathogens and then all the adults who are not up to date on the 72 doses of 16 vaccines we give our children.
If I were Grandma, the only way I would agree to see those kids would be via Skype or FaceTime. Let Mommy Freeloader explain that one.
5
Another concern with contracting measles is that the brain-damaging form may lie in wait for 30+ years before it begins to do its sad work. It may be (this is not proven, and is only a conjecture) one of the causes of dementia in later life. Vaccines save lives! Perhaps you can help your sister “understand” that the Mercury-based preservative has been withdrawn from the American market, and there was never a suggestion that the single dose vaccine was dangerous. She may be able to get her pediatrician to order single dose vials and use these for her children. This might allay her fears of the “possible” (totally undocumented) mercury poisoning and the harm “done” (also totally undocumented) by multiple vaccines in a single injection.
8
You might not be able to vaccinate her kids, but you have no obligation to put your mother at additional risk by watching them. Indeed, because you are your mother’s primary carer, I would argue that your ethical duty to your mother outweighs the convenience and financial assistance you are giving your sister.
33
Surely there's a point at which not vaccinating your children becomes abuse and CPS can intervene...
10
God help us, in each case so simple, yet such complexity in the responses. How about these:
Anti-Vaxx:
You are the primary cargiver for you mother. Your sister is the primary caregiver for her children.
Solution: No more babysitting until your sister can prove that she has children that are vaccinated.
Self-Healing Mystic:
No contact with her, in any way for years.
Somehow able to diagnose her with suffering a mental breakdown
Assuming she: 1. Needs help; and 2. Has no friends
Solution: Continue having no contact, you didn't care then, so
why act on two major assumtions instead of acting on facts?
(P.S.: Regarding the last line in your letter: "...to help this person help themselves..." should be "...help themself..."
5
@Flic B
In what world is 'themself' a word? 'Herself' is called for.
As for the writer caring about the former acquaintance, you have no right to question or criticize his or her compassion. It required knowledge of the acquaintance's condition to arouse it, and compassion is always to be lauded.
2
One line in the anti-vaxxer answer suck in my craw, the one about violating the mom's "right" to make a vaccination choice for her kids. The nature of parental rolls is at the heart of the problem.
Children are not property. There is no immutable parental right with respect to children, other than to make them. Parental "rights" should properly be thought of as parental responsibilities. Abusive parents routinely have the parental rights terminated. Anti-vaxxers are fast approaching the point where they'll be considered abusive enough and irresponsible enough to warrant removal of their kids too.
In light of that, another option for this questioner is to seek temporary custody to get the kids vaccinated. Child Protective Services will either agree or disagree, probably depending on what state this is in.
We need state laws directly addressing parental responsibilities in this arena.
18
Sir why are you worried it looks like your kids are older than 1 year and if they are vaccinated why are you so worried? Have you poisoned your family with vaccines? Are they immuno-compromised ? Too bad, ask Richard Pan for a medical exemption because I bet you wont' get one.
So I appreciate your altruism in wanting to get everyone vaccinated, that is very kind of you. But tell me just one thing, what books have you read on the subject?
2
someone you barely knew long ago, with whom you had fleeting Facebook contact, now pops up in a foreign country and soon gets around to a sob story asking for money? if this isn't a scam based on a stolen identity, it should be. either ask a Nigerian prince for advice or just delete the phony.
11
Many years ago, I taught at Gallaudet College (now University). There were several students there whose pregnant mothers had been exposed to measles, which caused them to be born deaf, and sometimes blind and deaf.
I find it unconscionable that anyone would refuse to get their children vaccinated against such a devastating illness. I realize that many, in today's culture, have no concern for anyone but themselves.
I also know that the writer cannot have these children vaccinated on her own. She would, no doubt, face legal consequences if she did so. Not allowing them around her immune compromised mother is probably her only choice.
25
@Ashton Laurent unfortunately the same could have happened around vaccinated people who can also carry measles but sometimes in a more dangerous way because they can be asymptomatic carriers. Waning immunity, vaccine failure and shedding all make the vaccinated potential victims of these illnesses as well.
Having a case of measles or rubella gives a person lifetime immunity to the disease. This is the one concrete advantage of contracting these diseases - the lifetime immunity.
If grandma is indeed "elderly" it's extremely likely that she had these diseases as a child and thus has lifetime immunity. If there's any doubt, or a concern because her immune system is compromised, she can have a blood titer test done to see if she has immunity to measles, mumps or rubella.
Having a titer test is the best course of action for any older person who is unsure of their immunity. Vaccines are reasonably safe but they are not completely safe. The MMR vaccine is not without side effects, some potentially life changing. A certain number of people who get the MMR vaccine will develop encephalitis even though the number is much lower than the number of people who develop encephalitis from the disease.
Grandma probably should have a titer test done to see if she has immunity. Having the test would save the whole family a great deal of needless angst if the test reveals she already has immunity. If her immunity is shown to have been depleted due to the lupus, the test results would provide an explanation for why she can no longer baby sit.
8
@Todd Fox
And a certain number of people who get the measles
get encephalitis. I'll take my chances on the vaccine.
2
I'm a little concerned by the implication that the woman in the second one needs to "be brought back home" so that other people can "manage her care"-- if she's not causing harm to herself or others (which it seems like she's not), she's the only one who should be managing her care, whether or not she knows she has a problem. Taking autonomy away from mentally ill people often leads to abuse and a worsening of the mental illness, even when it's done with their interests in mind. People should be in control of their own treatment. Hopefully, the woman in question will seek treatment herself, but if she doesn't, and if she's not in danger or causing others to be in danger, her care should be her responsibility.
4
I think it depends on the nature and severity of the mental illness as to whether the person can indeed manage his/her own care.
4
If the children have a father who shares joint legal custody of the children ( he may not be the custodial parent but still retain legal custody) he can have the children vaccinated.
27
From several posts it appears many think a case of measles is no big deal. It was for me. I was 7 with a 105 temp after the aspirin. It was 1963 and the vaccine came out 3 months later. I had to undergo hearing and cognitive testing to make sure I didn’t have neurological damage. According to the CDC, as many as one out of every 20 children with measles gets pneumonia, the most common cause of death from measles in young children. In 1980, before the start of global vaccine programs, 2.6 million people died from it. Measles can be fatal.
I love the ethicist’s description of the anti-vaxer as a drug resistant pathogen. The best to treat them is isolation. No free babysitting. No visits to mum. Let every vulnerable person, and those with children who haven’t reached vax age know about sister and her brood. This is not a time to be PC. That’s how we got our latest epidemic - the religious loophole. I’ve utilised Isolation and quarantine as a nurse. It’s quite effective. That and hand washing were the basics that revolutionised nursing. It’s still the backbone of infection control.
66
@Susan O’Donnell I’m sorry you had such a bad case. I did not have that experience when I had it over 60 years ago. Now we know that measles depletes vitamin A which causes more severe cases and deaths. The CDC now recommends treating measles with high dose vitamin A. Although it is unfortunate that you had a bad case you now have lifelong immunity with protection from certain cancers. There is peer reviewed research on this that you can look up. Unfortunately, those who get vaccinated do not have those advantages and the immunocompromised are vulnerable to the vaccinated as well due to waning immunity, vaccine shedding, vaccine asymptomatic carriers, vaccine waning immunity.
6
@Susan O’Donnell. I also had measles as a child. I thought I was going to die and so did my siblings. I have never been sicker.
7
@Susan O’Donnell - Every single kid in my school had measles by the fifth grade. I had it and don't remember much about it. Winter flu was far worse.
Now chickenpox? Two weeks of my mother yelling, "don't scratch" and that stupid worthless Calamine lotion. One of my fondest childhood memories was giving chickenpox to my brother and listening to mom yell at him for two weeks.
Parents would routinely bring healthy kids around the sick ones to just get it all over.
I asked my neighbor lady who was born in Samoa and grew up in Hawaii if she had had measles. She laughed and said, "of course, I went to school".
I asked her if the adults seemed at all concerned or scared by measles. No, she told me. We both agreed that the adults were far more freaked out by head lice than measles.
As for pneumonia, I am sure everyone remembers the day that Hillary dropped in New York due to this illness...and she had been vaccinated.
According to the CDC itself, one of the possible side effects of the MMR vaccine is deafness along with seizures, coma and even death.
The media needs to publish again and again that the autism link to vaccines was a total money-making scam that has been completely disproved by independent scientists around the globe in study after study!
31
Not to put too fine a point on this but many people are presenting as fact the belief that it has been "scientifically proven" that vaccines don't trigger autism. This isn't true. No scientist has been able to prove that there is a link between autism and vaccines, but this is not the same at all as "proving" that autism isn't triggered by vaccines.
There are also people claiming that vaccines are "perfectly safe" which they aren't. It's all risk versus benefit calculations. Denying the very real, if small risk, of vaccine damage is dishonest and foolish. It doesn't help anyone's case to deny that girls have died after receiving the HPV vaccine or that occasionally a child develops encephalitis after an MMR vaccine.
There are risks and benefits.
4
No reliable science has ever proved that.
Papers Autism Vaccine link
https://www.scribd.com/doc/220807175/146-Research-Papers-Supporting-the-Vaccine-Autism-Link#
2
@Jefflz it has never been disproved by any reliable science. Here are the independent peer reviewed studies that show the link
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/magazine/can-i-get-my-anti-vaxx-sisters-kids-vaccinated.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur#commentsContainer
1
I’ll do it for you and we don’t have to tell her.
17
I think we can thank social media for 95% of the conspiracy theories out there. We can definitely thank social media for giving traction to these absolutely ridiculous, even dangerous theories about vaccines, climate change being a “hoax,” etc.
And then the insane political conspiracy theories that spread like wildfire. My hair stylist told me a couple of years ago that the shooting at Sandy Hook was a liberal media hoax spread by Obama. When I told her that was absolutely untrue and cruel to the survivors, she shrugged and said she “read it somewhere. Several times.”
It is shocking how little people read and check their sources, and yet the less they read and check, the more gullible they become.
The anti- vaxxers are now a full fledged cult that believes its own made-up “science.”
33
@SCZ Alex Jones was spreading that conspiracy theory. He has been sued for defamation by families of the victims at Sandy Hook. Hope they win.
I would not give money to such a hair stylist. Hope you went elsewhere in the future.
11
@SCZ
I would have gotten out of the chair and left. Give no quarter to harmful nonsense.
8
Strongly disagree with advice given for FB mystic friend. Our current culture discourages feedback because it’s easier to detach, pretend, and accommodate. Contact her not with the expectation that some change may occur (you don’t know if she has a mental problem or is a grifter or maybe the CIA is actually involved?#*, as other commentators have noted), but that you have an obligation to your own sense of rightness and connectedness. Tell her you have notes these shifts via FB and thought it was strange. Her response will fill in a lot of blanks.
1
@CC
agree. Noticing and doing nothing is not a response to your own internal wisdom when you recognize something is off. it was mentioned to contact maybe a family member (which was backtracked to day they probably know and can’t do anything). Often families get complacent and don’t realize until other people notice a problem is going on. I think this concerned person to gently ‘try’ something rather than do nothing.
1
How old is the mother? If she was born before 1971, she probably had the childhood diseases and is therefore immune. It’s the children who are at risk.
@Linda Except that the mother is immunocompromised, so her immunity is far from guaranteed. Even exposure as a healthy person doesn't guarantee this and she'd need to have titers checked.
4
It concerns me that so many people who like myself support a woman's sovereignty over her own body will deny a parent's sovereignty over the health risks of their children. The MMR
and Gardisil are 2 vaccinations made by Merck. Merck also
makes the Ebola vaccine that many people including health care workers in West Africa are resisting. Japan dc'd the MMR 7 years
ago. Gardisil is no longer recommended by Japanese government. Angela Merckle's party wants to fine parents resisting MMR specifically 2800 euros. There is resistance to
MMR world wide. I rank Merck up there with Monsanto.
The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights Article 6 states "Any preventative, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention " must have "the prior, free and informed consent of the person involved." To my mind, the enthusiasm for forced immunizations smacks of fascism.
5
Nope, it's for the public's and the kids safety. Don't let you stupid conspiracy theories cause someone's death.
57
@Retired County Nurse
I don't understand the line you draw between women's bodily autonomy and what you term parental sovereignty. Wouldn't women's bodily autonomy suggest there is no such thing as parental sovereignty over their children? Such parental control extinguishes the bodily autonomy of the child, exactly what the right wing wants to do toward women.
I think you bring up a good issue with respect to regulating the pharmaceutical industry, especially their overseas manufacturing in China and India. However, most anti-vaxxers worry about autism, not septic reactions from contaminated vaccines. The entire anti-vax concept is built on a weak foundation. It is pseudo science backed by flawed reasoning.
6
As a nurse, I believe in epidemiology. With the growth of infections like MRSA, practitioners who never dealt with isolation protocols are definitely being schooled. Practice will be dictated by what’s best for the most. That’s not facist.
I’m no fan of big pharma, but we’ve got to deal with them. If governments weren’t so intent on coddling big business, things might be different.
I suggest you read this article about measles in Japan from the Lancet.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(04)16715-9/fulltext#%20
Japan has a major measles problem now, and is one of the major importers of the disease to the United States.
8
Everyone by law should be vaccinated. The end.
24
Really? Forced vaccination? Do you remember in the 70s when there was pending legislation which would have forced people to be vaccinated against the swine flu? People started dying from the vaccine so the plan to compel vaccination was quickly scrapped.
I did NOT consent to the swine flu vaccine even though I had no problem whatsoever over getting a tetanus/diphtheria booster that same year. I disagreed with the idea that the government has a right to force me to submit to a medical procedure. In the case of the swine flu vaccine it turned out that I was right and the medical experts were wrong. The risks from the shot far outweighed the potential benefit to society.
Bodily autonomy is a fundamental form of individual liberty, as guaranteed by the constitution. Like it or not, you don't have the right to determine what I must put in my own body.
3
@One who knows
Except, of course, those who have legitimate health problems ... it's those people we are really trying to protect through herd-immunity.
3
@One who knows
No. You accomplish it thru continuing education, restrictions on on-vaccinated people in public during outbreaks, peer pressure, safer vaccines, etc. Proposing forced vaccinations is a grotesque violation of a free Democracy.
2
Would we lock up someone who was randomly firing a gun in the public square? How is refusing to vaccinate children any different.
Both clearly constitute the crime of reckless endangerment. And both should be prosecuted.
24
For me the decision is simple: get the kids vaccinated and live with the resentment from your sister and others. Children need care from protecting parents, not ones that put them at risk.
Might you get arrested and put on trial and serve prison time? I'd do it in a heart beat to protect these children from the possible consequences of their "ill-informed" and dangerous parents
7
@dkensil I'm very pro-vaccine, but making non-emergency medical decisions for someone else kids is completely unethical. Some children do have bad reactions to vaccines (although not the one that this particular anti-vaxxer is worried about), so it really should not be done in secret.
5
Children and adults DO have bad reactions to the MMR shot. It's not "anti-vaccine to be honest about the risks and side effects.
Long before the recent concerns over autism, there were concerns over the MMR vaccine and encephalitis. A small number of children who receive the MMR develop encephalitis as a result of the shot. This is verified by the CDC. The number is much, much smaller than the number of children who develop encephalitis as the result of getting sick with the measles, but the risk is real. A child should never be vaccinated without their parent's knowledge.
2
@Shelly
I agree with this. Unless the letter writer knows her nieces/nephews' medical history, she shouldn't be getting them vaccinated just in case there is something she doesn't know about that could cause problems (and honestly shouldn't really do it behind their mom's back, even if it is with the right intentions). That said, they should absolutely be barred from seeing their grandmother except on limited occasions and the letter writer has every right to refuse to provide them with free child care.
1
For the sister with an antivaxer in the family, i totally get it though difficult to argue with antivaxers. How old are the kids? If past five you might be able to convinced her that they are past the age of ‘contracting’ autism. Not rational if course, but might with with non rational antivaxers....
11
I wonder what the overlap is between the Anti-Vax-ers and Climate Change Deniers?
Seems there is a growing segment that just refutes science.
23
@Norville T. Johnson if you have the independent science that proves vaccines are safe and protective please provide it.
@Norville T. Johnson please provide the independent peer reviewed double blind placebo controlled study that proves vaccines are safe and protective.
1
Of course the caregiver can't get her sister's children vaccinated. And if her mother has a compromised immune system, she probably shouldn't be babysitting any kids. There are plenty of illnesses you can catch from kids for which there are no vaccines.
17
Is it wrong to take the kids to the hospital if they were extremely sick but the parents refused to seek treatment?
Is it wrong to feed or clothe kids if the parents refuse?
I think it's time to make inoculations mandatory nationwide and allow local authorities to charge parents with child abuse if they refuse. This isn't about personal choice or what you believe, it's about the safety of the entire population. Too bad it's come to this but the government mandates lots of things to save people from themselves - wearing seatbelts, fire proof bedding and pajamas, anti smoking campaigns, warning labels on alcohol and everything else, banning powerful magnets that kids were swallowing, etc.
18
@Ali thank you for the brightest comment posted.
@jeffm
I'm very pro-vaccination, but unless she knows the medical history of the kids, she shouldn't be taking them to a free vaccination clinic. There are people, indeed the very people that make it important for everyone who can be vaccinated to be vaccinated, who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons (allergies, immunosuppresant disorders, etc.). She's not risking them contracting autism, but there are risks if she doesn't know their full medical info.
1
Hmmm. I pay $2,500/mo for my two kids to attend daycare. If I could get free care from family and use the vaccine thing as an excuse, it may be worth $30k/yr. if you refuse to watch the kids, nobody else will take them and she’ll have to get them vaccinated AND pay a ton of money. I’m sure if u refuse to watch the kids, she will get them vaccinated
21
The first letter writer and her mother need to stop minding the sister's children. This is the morally justifable and actually quite essential action to take here. How odd that they would prefer to do something dishonest in secret than to make the choice they have the right to make and leave the sister to deal with the natural consequence of her poor decisions.
36
Unfortunately, the sister is not the only one who might suffer the consequences of her bad decisions. Her children are most likely to suffer the consequences.
1
As the non-custodial parent, I took my kid in and had him vaccinated. I was prepared to tell the judge why and accept the consequences. Didn't have to.
43
As a physician I would point out that failure to vaccinate puts the childrens' lives at risk. We need to simply require it. If you can do it by subterfuge, do it. The rights of the children outweigh the rights of the parents.
26
@Dan Woodard MD
You should check with your licensing board.
7
@Dan Woodard MD
So, here apparently Dr. Dan approves of MDs above the U.S. Constitution. No one issued you a license to break all the rules, you are expected to first "Do No Harm". Right ?
4
@Nominae Vaccinations don't cause harm. And doctors are permitted to act in the patients best interests under certain circumstances.
6
I don't agree with the stance that it is unethical to vaccinate a child against the wishes of the parent. If there is a legitimate medical reason to avoid vaccinations, of course I would respect that. Otherwise, the well-being of the child and society as a whole takes precedence the neuroses of the parents. If a child in my care temporarily were malnourished, then I would feed them. If they were unvaccinated, I would get them vaccinated, out of my own pocket if necessary. The parents could complain, threaten me, take me to court, etc., but they would not be able to undo the vaccination.
28
@Zach Dorman-Jones what about the protection of the children who are about to be vaccinated?
@Zach Dorman-Jones
Totally agree, but does she know the medical history of these kids? If she doesn't, she does put them at risk if they have allergies or immune issues she doesn't know about. Also, secretly vaccinating the kids behind the sister's seems like a far more extreme and aggressive solution to the problem than simply refusing the free child care and access to the grandmother until the sister vaccinates her children.
1
There is no link between vaccinations and autism. Period. You know where there is a link? It's between the age of the parents and autism. There are plenty of studies indicating that link. Spend some time reading them.
There is also a link between some of the bad things that happen to kids and the parents total refusal to take any responsibility for their own personal choices. That's not from a study, just observation.
19
Nominae, it is time for you to reject the information sources you used. Chances are they are also providing you with other false information. No matter how smart we are, we need good information to make good decisions and you are simply not getting it.
4
@Nominae
There has not been mercury in ANY human vaccine for decades.
2
@Nominae
Can you cite the scientific studies?
When I was in elementary school, in the early 1960s, I was friends with a girl named, C, who happened to be the daughter of my pediatrician. He was a wonderful, dedicated doctor. My own father was a raging alcoholic, who was terrified we kids might get polio, but who refused to allow us to be vaccinated, fearing we would contract the virus from the vaccine, which in fact some early patients did. Doctors still made housecalls in those days, so my pediatrician was well aware of my home situation and one quiet Saturday, while C and I explored the lab in his clinic, he took me aside and said, "I've seen too many children with polio, so you must have this" and gave me a sugar cube with the Sabin vaccine. I was only a kid, but I knew it was important, and I was grateful, and I never told my Dad.
97
Interesting story. I was vaccinated not long after the killed polio vaccine was developed. Most of the kids I knew received the live vaccine on the sugar cube at school. I begged to get the sugar cube instead of the needle but my mother said no.
The pediatrician my mother took me to recommended the killed polio vaccine, administered by injection, because he had suspicions that there might be some cases of polio which were the result of receiving the live virus vaccine.
By the time my child was little virtually all pediatricians administered the live polio vaccine. You could only get the killed polio vaccine by special order, but the doctor we used actually preferred giving the killed vaccine so that's what my child had. He had made an extensive study of vaccine efficacy and safety and concluded that the small degree of extra protection from the live vaccine was not balanced out by the increased risk of side effects. This is why he gave the killed vaccine. I guess our doctor was ahead of his time because the killed vaccine is now preferred because it's safer.
3
Is there a father for these kids? Does he object to immunizing the kids too? Is he gone, deceased?
25
re: anti-vax sister.
first: stop babysitting the kids. They may get the measles and recover, your mom may get sick and die. That's the easy calculation. Give your sister a heads up and explain it as flatly as possible, invoking your mom's doctor.
second: ethics are tricky, but no, you may not have your sister's four children vaccinated without her consent. You can continue to talk to her about it including trying to get your mom's doctor to intervene.
third: ethic are clear in this case. There are three groups: those who can get vaccinated and do, those who cannot get vaccinated due to immune health issues, and those who can get vaccinated and choose not to. This last group is acting unethically toward the second. There is no other way to understand it.
58
@TNM Actually, even if he should attempt to get his sister's kids vaccinated, any medical professional who did so would be open to a lawsuit and possible loss of license.
3
I have a friend who also believes the C.I.A. is out to get her and that the government was involved in causing 9/11.
My friend isn't psychotic. When I met her years ago in graduate school, she was an intelligent, reasonable and delightful person.
What's happened is that alcoholism has pickled her brain. I no longer have anything to do with her - she isn't rational. According to her sister, she drinks herself in to a stupor - or seizures - on a daily basis.
She wore me out.
She refuses to consider that she has a drinking problem . Her family has not interceded in any truly meaningful way - that I know of. I suspect that's because both of her parents are alcoholics and at least one of her 4 siblings has been in prison for drugs.
I hate to see someone only 58 years old throw her life away on drinking. But she has demons I have never been able to discuss with her. She shuts down or denies problems.
I still love my friend and if I am now past wanting to get involved with a good person I truly care about, why in the world would anyone want to take on trying to redirect a psychotic they've seen on facebook (assuming their diagnosis is right and they're not just a huckster) but that they haven't seen or been in touch with in decades?
Sounds like a fools errand.
21
@fast/furious Your friend might have an underlying mental health disorder which is being managed by alcohol use. Self-medicating with drugs and/or alcohol is quite common for people with mood disorders.
1
My older children caught the chicken pox before the vaccine was available from some moron who took his child with unscabbed chicken pox sores to a jam-packed kids museum on a wintery Sunday afternoon. I lost weeks of pay from having to stay home with because it spread through them one by one.
My youngest child's got the vaccine as soon as it was available. Her third grade class used small tables instead of desks. My daughter was the only child at her table who did not get chicken pox. The other moms (stay at home moms and those with nannies) thought it was just fine.
I have seen children hospitalized for severe chicken pox. I didn't think it was so fine.
61
@Wrytermom my kids had it too before there was a vaccine. One of them was not too impacted. The other one suffered horribly. I too lost several weeks at work. My husband also got it and was very ill. He is a lecturer with no tenure and fortunately it was over break, otherwise he would have lost his job.
19
Stop watching her kids - immediately. If she wants to be willfully ignorant, she can pay for it, literally and figuratively.
85
@Alexandra
And those who get chicken pox are candidates for nasty shingles in older age . . .
7
@Ali
Children who get the vaccine are much less likely to get shingles, so I don’t understand your comment that “children are gettting shingles.” Goldman is not an M.D. but a data analyst . . .
2
@Ali This is not true. Also, amazingly, there are vaccines for Shingles too.
Personally as an adult who never had chickenpox, but who did not have immunity, I'm pretty happy there is a vaccine for the chickenpox!
1
Sis it’s time to stop babysitting.
67
Why is not vaccinating your kids not considered child endangerment?
If it was, you could report the imbalanced sister to the Dept of Children's Service.
If she wont stop believing her nonsense - stop baby sitting the kids and tell their friend's parents the kids aren't vaccinated.
We are all being way too polite about this nonsense,
48
That's an interesting question. Medical neglect is a an issue that family courts take very seriously. It's really an inconsistent position to take when the state can intervene in cases where parents don't take their children to a doctor for check-ups, or to a dentist for cleanings, or neglect other important medical needs. The same standard should be applied to vaccinations.
4
LW2: It's social media. I never changed one person's opinion about anything on social media. Facts and experience are irrelevant. You are trying to teach a pig how to sing. It doesn't work. And it annoys the pig.
21
LW#1 - I didn't think a non-parent could have children vaccinated without the parents' written consent. Regardless, your elderly mother needs to be protected from the anti-vaxx crowd. Put an end to the child care STAT.
LW#2 - Why do you presume your mystic acquaintance is having a breakdown? She is more likely scamming people for money. This "mental illness" thing has become a true racket in this country. Don't want to take responsibility for your bad behavior? Claim you are mentally ill and watch the sympathy pour in. Any day now, Lori Loughlin will claim emotional inadequacies led her to game the college admission process. Meanwhile, the people who are truly struggling with mental health issues can't get proper insurance or care.
16
No, you can’t get your sister’s children vaccinated against her wishes. This would be immoral and illegal. Additionally, no reputable medical caregiver would allow it.
But you can put the cost of her irresponsibility back in her by declining to look after them. You’re only enabling her to put your mother and others at risk; thus you are culpable. Why are you letting her use you that way?
44
To Sister of Anti-Vaxx:
1. Do not force vaccination on your sister's children.
2. DO all you can to prevent your mother being exposed to all unvaccinated people or people who are sick or contagious.
3. Talk to your mother's doctor and get the doctor to write a letter To Whom It May Concern, stating the reasons why your mother must be protected from unvaccinated people, and people who are sick or contagious.
4. Make copies of that letter, and send or hand one to your sister, and anyone else who plans to visit your mom - before their visits.
Your sister is being irresponsible and foolish regarding her children's health and well being. She is being callous and disrespectful of you and your mother by insisting that you provide care for her children, and still refusing to get them vaccinated, if nothing else, to protect your mother.
Your sister has made her choice, and the truth is, your mother has no choice but to ban people who are unvaccinated, sick or contagious.
41
@Think
6. Be sure, like the better hospitals do, to keep your mother from being exposed to recently vaccinated people bc many of those vaccines shed. So rather than blame the entire unvaccinated population be sure to blame the recently vaccinated and the careless doctors that don't bother to alert their patients or the public to this very real problem.
2
Looks like the sister is overwhelmed by life, probably feeling that she can’t do much...so she finds a place that’s all hers to control — her kids.
11
Yep, tell you sister she's persona non grata and you and the rest of the family are off limits until she smartens up.
24
Provide the sister with solid information about the lies of Andrew Wakefield who made a fortune from his autism/vaccine scam. His journal paper was withdrawn and his medical license in Britain was revoked.
There is a vast body of clinical data collected by hundreds of scientists around the globe proving that the benefits of childhood vaccines far, far outweigh any risks. The one bogus paper claiming the autism link is a human disgrace. There are also absurd claims of profit motive on the part of Big Pharma Vaccines represent about 2% of their business. They would actually make more money if there were more sick un-vaccinated people.
Work hard to inform the sister of the scientifically proven truth about vaccines. Andrew Wakefield launched a word-wide vaccine scare that has cost many lives.
Any parent who has doubts about the measles vaccine needs to look up and read the moving and true account of Roald Dahl's 7 year old daughter's death from measles.
Roald Dahl who knows the boundless pain of a lost child urges parents to vaccinate their children because, as he points out, the risks are virtually nil and the benefits are enormous!!
Education is the best way to solve this tragic dilemma.
18
@Jefflz
The sister is beyond logic. Like Sparky, no contact with sister until she vaccinates the children. If she doesn't care that she is putting her mother at risk, along with others who are medically unable to be vaccinated, she shouldn't be using mom to take care of her kids.
One of the problems with anti-vaxxers, is that they are too young to remember what measles was like before vaccines. I'm a senior citizen who had measles as a child. I was very sick, confined to a darkened bedroom with the dog for company, as measles often negatively affected eyesight. I also got chicken pox, mumps and rubella measles during my childhood. When I had my own child I had him vaccinated for everything that was available. No chicken pox vaccine so he had chicken pox (fortunately, a very mild case) at age 6.
It's the height of selfishness and child endangerment not to vaccinate children.
12
Your sister has made her choice.
You must make yours. Your mother must make hers.
The choice is simple - either watch these unvaccinated children or do not. The complex family and emotional dynamics behind it are not so simple.
Do you risk your own health in the interest of good family bonds or do you put your own health first? This is especially true for your mother.
If I were faced with this choice it would be clear, though perhaps not an easy one: Tough luck, sis - and good luck finding daycare that will take unvaccinated children.
31
My degrees are in science. I have reached the conclusion there are no cures for Stupid. In my view the care giver's choices are accept visitations by her sister's family or not. Visitation acceptance is a choice.
It is time, as a society, we stop pandering to stupidity, call it what it is and move on.
48
@Gordon as a scientist perhaps you can provide us with the independent peer reviewed double blind placebo controlled study that proves vaccines are safe and protective.
1
Ethics, schmethiks.
You and your sister suffer from similar maladies that manifest in different ways: you are both obsessed with safety and control. Your sister is desperate to believe that her behavior can protect her children from autism and other afflictions, because facing the horrible, random reality of childhood disability and death is just too terrifying. You are obsessed with protecting your mother from risk, even if it involves alienating your sister and driving away your mother's grandchildren, which may be one of the few joys in her life. You want your mother to live, but what do you want her to live FOR?
If your mom thoughtfully decides that the small-but-not-zero risk of death is worth it to have her unvaccinated grandchildren around, then let her take that risk. Have that conversation with her. Consider the possibility that you and your sister don't really care if your actions or inactions hurt other people. Perhaps you just want to feel less anxious, and you mask this selfish goal as some form of altruism.
7
From the letter "My mother and other relatives have implored my sister to reconsider her anti-vaccination stance. We have told her that if she doesn’t, we will have to stop watching her children" it seems the grandmother wants the kids vaccinated too.
14
@Bastardus Markus
Yes, I agree. What's not clear is if the writer's mother is ok with sneaking the kids off to get vaccinated, potentially causing an irreparable rift with her anti-vax daughter. I know the grandmother is not happy with the situation, but if this rebellious action is truly for her benefit, then she should have an opportunity to say "no."
1
Anti-vaxxers are creating walking biological weapons. They must be shunned and avoided. I feel sorry for their children who are innocent.
35
@Joan Sutton please provide the independent peer reviewed double blind placebo controlled study that proves vaccines are safe and protective.
1
@Ali Please talk to some people who've been maimed by measles (blindness deafness, etc.) or have lost children to it. Here's a little taste of the available information: "In the decade before 1963 when a vaccine became available, nearly all children got measles by the time they were 15 years of age. It is estimated 3 to 4 million people in the United States were infected each year. Also each year, among reported cases, an estimated 400 to 500 people died, 48,000 were hospitalized, and 1,000 suffered encephalitis (swelling of the brain) from measles."
https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/history.html
5
The main reason why it will be almost impossible to convince anti-vaxxers is that their position is to thoroughly asinine. Once they realize that, their brain won't allow them to admit it. It becomes a self-reinforcing delusion with the single goal of maintaining self-worth.
That is how dictatorships survive. Once the people realize how wrong they were, they can't admit it and they will continue their march towards self-destruction.
Trump knows all about this phenomenon.
The Democrats don't.
16
ones even though vaccines harm 1/10 people?
Harvard-Pilgrim study
https://healthit.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf
2
Totally agree. I know a number of Trump-voters who now can't find a way to admit they were taken in by a bloviating charlatan. It's tough to say "I was wrong."
5
getting those children vaccinated without the permission of their parent would be entirely unethical! you and your elderly mother should stay away from those kids if you don't want to risk infection. it's that simple. i can't believe you would feel so entitled to want to inject someone else's children with a foreign substance to make YOU feel better. fyi: I am pro vaccine but I am entirely against the attitude of people like you who would take other people's choices away from them for your own benefit. the ethical thing to do would be to either stay away or take the necessary steps to boost you and your mother's immunity to diseases those children are susceptible to.
2
@Ali
Where are the double blind etc studies you keep demanding from others that proves your point? Shouldn’t you quote them every time you post?
During the sixties our schools mass vaccinated us without parental consent... However, in today’s litigious climate I would not try it. I was told by a teacher she can not even teach a lesson about religions without calls to the principal.
2
Frankly I doubt that you were vaccinated without parental consent. I remember school vaccination programs during that era where children lined up to receive the live polio vaccine administered on sugar cube. All of my friends took the sugar cube. I wasn't allowed to.
I begged my mother to let me get a sugar cube instead of a shot, but she insisted on the shot instead. The shot was killed polio vaccine and it was what our doctor recommended. I was fully vaccinated against polio, just not at school.
The schools notified parents of the vaccines being administered and parents gave permission or notified the school that they wanted to opt out of the free vaccine program. The schools did NOT vaccinate children without parental permission.
2
Kids can be taken away from parents that harm them on purpose or by negligence.
Anti-Vaxxers are at the very list negligent on their kids health. It should be illegal not to vaccinate, and enforced with kids of access to public services and monetary fines.
Not all opinions are equally valid, not all things are subjective. Our life expectancy and child survival has gone up in amazing g proportion thanks to vaccines. Anti-vaxxers our all the population at risk, not only themselves. Their paranoia should not override the overall health of our society. I know this sounds draconian, but: No vaccine - no public services
15
The gentleman from the UK who originated the preposterous idea that vaccines cause autism is a FORMER physician. His license to practice medicine was revoked in the UK. He may never practice medicine again, Ever, Anywhere. Unfortunately, he moved to the United States and now resides in Austin, TX, where he continues to peddle this utter nonsense. He is a complete charlatan. Science has thoroughly disproved his claims. Vaccination should be the law in all 50 states, no exception granted unless a child is immunocompromised.
38
@NH
The fact that this charlatan is now living in the USA is most interesting. Does he have a green card, or some kind of permanent visa to live here? Has he become a US Citizen. This should be investigated and a movement should be formed to have him deported for endangering children and other peoples lives.
6
This.
I agree that babysitting the unvaccinated children is similar to taking in hungry children and then not feeding them.
Why not tell the children's mother (the sister) that you intend to have the children vaccinated, if they continue to visit your mother's house? Then your sister is forewarned. Let her decide which outcome -- finding an alternative babysitter or letting you get her kids vaccinated -- distresses her more.
In any case, the status quo is intolerable. One should not enable serious misbehavior by relatives.
25
@bernard
Can't do that. Vaccinating the children against the will of the legal guardian would amount to physical assault and constitute a felony.
2
Re: CIA article. Sounds like my wife. Took off to SA 12 years ago. Her family told me to cut her $ that she would get from her business but I couldn’t because it was legally hers. Left me to mind a niece we raised and her business we built. Besides, it kept at least some minor line of communication open. Then she latched on to an internet doomsday group, then developed Morgellons, then became abusive, what a mess. I was uncomfortable divorcing someone when they were down. Now she’s better but ...
2
I don’t argue with stupid people, it’s a waste of time. I would cut off all contact with your sister and her disease carrying children, if that’s a burden on her, it’s one she chooses.
I would call Children Protective Services on her, that she doesn’t have her kids in school and refuses to vaccinate may be cause for her to lose custody.
Imagine the education these kids are not getting, the entire home schooling thing should be abolished. What kind of future are these kids going to have when they attempt to apply for college, they usually don’t accept a letter from mommy saying they got treat grades.
18
I agree that the children should not be near the grandmother and that the sister is making a choice that impacts not only her family, but the public at large.
However, I am curious as to why there is an assumption that the caretaker (not grandmother) is a woman. I find no mention of that in the post and the name is withheld. Is it because of the image at the top?
5
@Carolyn I'd guess it is because statistically women are more likely to be the caregivers for their parents then are men.
At least some commenters assumed the opposite though.
2
I think that anti-vaxx Mom would change her mind quickly if she had to pay for otherwise free babysitting. Additionally, she will have to provide total care without any relief from anyone. Very foolish Mom.
17
Is there a reason why you thought it appropriate to mention only the Orthodox Jewish children as the source of the measles epidemic?
3
Because they are the source of the outbreak. An unvaccinated child returned from a trip to Israel with the measles. Read the whole article before posting.
20
@Vivienne
"Name withheld" did not mention religion as a factor, only Appiah did. There have also been outbreaks throughout the country that have no connection with the Orthodox community.
1
@SE
Have you not been reading the newspapers, or have you been on a trip to Mars? There is no measles outbreak in New York City's Latin, Black, Polish, German, Asian or other communities. It's occurring within the Orthodox Jewish communities in Brooklyn! This is why it was mentioned.
6
The problem in the situation where the woman won't vaccinate her four children isn't her problem. She's already decided to let them risk getting measles, mumps, and rubella, and she doesn't care of they "give" those diseases to other people. The problem of the letter writer is that her mother could contract them unless she had them as a child. The mother has an autoimmune disease, lupus, that makes her very susceptible to contagious diseases. The mother's physician can do blood work to see if she has a natural immunity to those diseases. If not, the children should not be in her home.
I remember visiting a school for severely disabled children in the late 1970's. Due to a rubella epidemic in the early 1960's, many pregnant women contracted rubella. Their babies were born blind, deaf, and/or cognitively impaired. Seeing these children was heartbreaking. Are people no longer aware of this? The danger of rubella to pregnant women and their fetuses was well known in my parents' and grandparents' generation. The internet seems to have made many people unable to distinguish between verifiable scientific fact and "fake news."
40
@Linda
Male children who contract mumps because they haven't been vaccinated risk becoming infertile from the mumps virus. Incredible that some people are playing dice on this level with their children's lives.
6
@Linda
Yes, the actress Gen Tierney got rubella when she was pregnant and the child was born with severe developmental disabilities and I think she was institutionalized. This had negative effects on Tierney's mental health.
2
You cannot have your sister's kid vaccinated unless and until some court somewhere decides that not getting your kids protected is child neglect. If you need any more evidence that the flat-earth people are winning, here it is.
13
Your mother likely had measles as a child.
4
Simple, ethical solution: stop babysitting unvaccinated kids immediately. So it's a hardship for the sister....dying from a preventable disease is a bigger hardship.
I'd like to see parents who have no legitimate medical reason for not vaccinating their children prosecuted for child abuse. Measles isn't like catching a mild cold. It's a preventable, deadly disease.
27
I have a friend who is incredibly grateful that when her mom (who she later knew was mentally ill) would not allow her anywhere near water, her uncle secretly took her to swimming lessons. I don't think it is unethical for the relative to get the kids vaccinated (but I believe it would be illegal).
11
"...would violate her right to make these decisions." It's probably illegal, or at least actionable, since she's not their legal guardian. Myself, I think it would open a big can of worms.
But you don't make clear whether you think the violation would be of the mother's ethical right or legal right or just custom. And this is not a minor point.
If mean ethical, then you seem to be saying that the mother's right to make decisions for her child overrule the child's right to health & safety.
So you would consider the surreptitious feeding of a child not 'your own' (as we say, just as w/our pets) suffering chronic hunger or malnutrition caused by parents' eccentric dietary ideas as also morally violating the parents' right to do what they like w/ 'their own'. Letting them go hungry or sickly would be the ethical thing.
I wonder how well you regard the idea of government child protection agencies, since they exist to interfere with parental rights when they cause harm to the kids.
And you tell the letter-writer "you can't", rather than "I feel you really shouldn't." As though this isn't one person's view of the question but an objective fact that anyone can see if they look it up. Ya just can't. Period.
Of course that is correct if you are referring to law. But you probably aren't.
4
@a.h.
Also, should your Mother catch something that proves fatal, both you and your sister should be prosecuted as accessories to her murder.
I gather you and your sister and other relatives have been vaccinated and are not autistic. While it’s not a controlled study, you might point that out to her. And ask why she thinks someone with her genes would become autistic.
In the meantime, do not have the children vaccinated and just avoid physical contact.
8
With maturity and wisdom comes tolerance, acceptance, and resignation...leave her kids alone but feel free to express your concerns and to influence by reason. It worked for my brother’s two girls who were being homeschooled yet did not demonstrate the proper developmental markers for their age groups. I simply informed him in private that I had asked the children basic questions and was somewhat dismayed about my assessment. I allowed him to express the challenges that homeschooling presented with distractions and time management. The following year they started attending school and are thriving. In fact they are selling their home and moving out of town to a higher performing school district.
A family doctor or nurse would be a great ally and could be prepared to help you facilitate this important discussion with your sister in the proper setting. Listen to her fears about allergic reactions and other concerns carefully and offer to provide assistance to help her mitigate unexpected consequences. Keep your good intentions focused on the well being of the children.
Two heads are better than one!
18
I have systemic Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis , andI feel very angry at Anti-Vaxxers. This winter a simple cold quickly turned into pneumonia and all in all I was ill for over 7 weeks. I think back many years to raising my children, the incredibly challenging times during particularly painful flares - but always the most rewarding and wonderful period of my life. 35 years taking immunologic medicine, infusions and injections, my immune system is seriously compromised. I would like to tell parents whose anti-vax decisions have jeopardized my health and millions of other people, young and old, that they are doing a disservice to us and of course to their children. Their selfishness and stridency takes my breath away. Literally.
111
@lindap
You deserve so much credit for keeping going and raising a family while in constant pain. I think many people know nothing about the serious nature of lupus, or they wouldn't be making comments suggesting that the grandmother is in no danger from her grandchildren.
8
I suppose the reasoning behind the vaccination decision is this principle: We must allow some life-threatening people to move among us because the methods for disallowing them is too destructive of overall freedom, or at least too expensive. In other words, a balancing of interests.
We see this operating in other situations:
1. We don't look into the mental health of every would-be gun purchaser because the cost would be too great and also because of the intrusiveness (a certain restriction on my freedom to have to submit to a mental health check).
2. We don't require a breathalyzer check on everyone leaving a bar or restaurant for the same reasons (plus an unwillingness to offend clients).
The difference in applying the principle to vaccinations is that the downside is a possible uncontrollable nationwide epidemic costing thousands of lives. That would probably cause a lot of people to change their minds. (I have in mind the deadly 1918 worldwide flu epidemic, which caused millions of deaths).
At this point we are relying on 'herd immunity': if enough people have been immunized then it is (statistically) safe to allow the remainder to be possible carriers of a deadly disease. I think we are right now running a test of this reliance in several areas of the country, and challenging it in some places. I hope that, whatever the result, there will be a reliable investigation into it.
9
Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children should be placed in law enforcement custody and their children given the vaccines they should have already received. This isn’t a negotiable process. These people endanger the health and safety of everyone around them and are too dangerous to be allowed to continue making these choices.
23
There seems to be a bit of interweaving of threads going on in the anti-vax discussion, with answers, including the columnist's, mixing elements of whether it's practical, legal, and/or ethical to get the children vaccinated. It's almost certainly not legal, but even if it could be legally done, practically it would be a nightmare... the mother will find out and there will be a steep price to pay (perhaps steeper than simple cutting off babysitting).
But, is it ethical? The column seems to gloss this over. I'd point out that there is certainly a growing body of discussion within the medical community that supports that children have a right to health care and that right shouldn't be over-ridden by a mis-informed parent.
43
I don’t spoze it’s occurred that the real ethical dilemma is the sister’s, and she refuses to recognize that there is one.
14
Re: First letter about anti-vaxxer...
I certainly understand the desire to vaccinate your sister's children. I've wished at times I could slip anti-anxiety meds into a certain relative's food, but I wouldn't actually do it because that would be unethical and illegal.
Certainly I'd keep those kids away from their grandmother as long as their mother refuses to vaccinate them.
30
Let's say the grandmother is warned by her physicians not to be exposed to unvaccinated children, even if she loves them dearly. Their mother may be convinced that vaccines cause autism, but once she learns how expensive child care will be for her four little plague-carriers, I'm betting her “convictions” will fall victim to the economics of paying a sitter as opposed to having that extra cash in her pocket at the end of the month. She may quickly discover that no daycare will accept the unvaccinated at any price!
Quit rewarding her nonsensical beliefs with free child care and let her live in the real world.
87
@Kris Aaron
In addition to day cares, many sitters also decline to tend the unvacinnated.
11
Vaccinating kids which you do not have custody of would be ill-advised and likely expose you to significant legal liability. You could get sued or even face criminal charges - don't do it.
14
I can't believe I'm reading this. No, it is not ethical, moral, or non-heinous in any way for you to make secret medical decisions for your sister's children. A medical facility that allowed this to happen would probably incur immense legal liability. This would be a permanent relationship ender for me and any of my siblings who were foolish enough to do something like that.
Your best course of action is to continue to educate your sister about the horrible risks of non-vaccination, and to have her talk to as many MD's as you can find about the issue. Essentially none of them will recommend avoiding vaccination. My children went through their prime vaccination schedules about ten to twelve years ago during the height of the controversy. I made their pediatrician spread out their vaccinations over more widely spaced injection sessions rather than give them three composite vaccinations at once, but we kept to roughly the recommended schedule.
9
@Jim K Good comments. I have been surprised at how adamant people are on both sides of the debate and seems to signal a larger societal probem.
I am not anti-vaccine but do think the incredible schedule of vaccines can be problematic for some. Spreading out vaccinations is an appropriate response. How big an issue is it likely to be if some vaccinations take a bit longer to receive.
When people stop having rational conversations, using critical thinking skills, and debating issues of concerns we all lose.
1
@Suzanne
Okay. In the interests of having a rational conversation, please post your evidence that "spreading out" vaccinations is safer than the usual schedule.
4
LW#2 is facing another, arguably larger and certainly not ethics-related, problem: The strong possibility that this person who is now asking for "donations" is a scam artist. It is very common for people to be victimized by emails supposedly from a friend or acquaintance begging for money in some sort of emergency, only to be conned out of their money. Using Facebook instead of email spam is just as likely to be a way of separating the unwary from their funds.
13
@Deadline Scam was the first thing I thought too.
2
Depending on what city and country she is in, there may very well be good psychiatric care near at hand. I would investigate this, and if you find it is available, maybe seek out friends or acquaintances of hers who might be able to introduce her to the services.
2
The question, "Do I have an obligation to help my old, distant acquaintance, who I never really knew that well, and who now has a mental health problem?" sounds a bit like "Who is my neighbor, Lord?"
I'm not sure I can fully embrace the answer that the writer undoubtedly has lots of closer friends with mental health issues that she can also not help.
But, if the question were "How can I help?" then one answer is track down a phone number, pick up the phone and have a conversation (or, extend the offer of a conversation, at some future time when it's welcome). The mentally ill suffer from massive social isolation, and it is crushing.
8
The mother and daughter have discussed the situation, monitored the sister’s kids, etc. Infected people carry and can spread the disease before the breakout, so their monitoring is meaningless. The idea that they would illegally vaccinate the kids is ludicrous.
If they were serious about dealing with the potential danger, they would simply refuse to have the kids in the house. This sounds like typical dysfunctional family drama.
15
The anti-vax response was disappointing. I think the ethical and correct response should have been to advise the writer to quit watching the children. Period.
43
i would get them vaccinated, even behind her sister's back. she must think of the children and every person who may come in contact with them. her sister has her head in the sand.
3
Dear LW1, tell your sister that unless she vaccinates her children (and provides you with proof that she has done so) you will no longer babysit.
I think that you may be surprised at how fast she folds once she feels the pinch in her pocketbook.
I had several anti-vaxx members in my own family, and they all changed their tunes and got their kids vaccinated once they faced the prospect of forking over significant amounts of money due to their stance. (Private schools that accept unvaccinated kids aren't cheap, and neither are the babysitters you will need to cover the hours between the end of school and when you get home from work when after-school care services refuse your unvaccinated kids.)
They may have hated vaccines, but they hated spending money even more.
47
At what point will we take not vaccinating your children out of the realm of valid parenting decision and more into the realm of child abuse. If she saw her sister not feeding her children or physically assaulting her children, surely she’d step in and act.
Why is potentially signing her children up for a preventable disease any different?
11
Re: vaccinating children for whom you are not the legal guardian - that is illegal, as well as unethical. You might contact your local public health department, and if it's still able to, get the help of their nurses. They are experts in dealing with this type of situation. Public health nurses get no journalism coverage, and yet, they provide critical care to the people in their communities.
Re: possibly acutely ill person experiencing auditory hallucinations: you might try offering resources for those, such as the Hearing Voices organization. It provides peer support from people with lived experience and who have been able to deal successfully with the distressing nature of auditory hallucinations. Just checking in and re-connecting with the distressed person is helpful.
If encountering someone who seems to be responding to command hallucinations, that might mean ramping up and obtaining an urgent or immediately available support.
2
Besides stating the obvious that it is illegal to have a minor vaccinated without the parents permission or signature, does anyone truly believe that a child would not tell their parent about it?
13
I see 2 distinct questions within the scenario presented here. Despite the hand-wringing, the answers to both questions seem pretty straightforward. It would be ethically impermissible to vaccinate the children without their Mother's explicit approval. With regard to the health risk for family members providing childcare, it is equally unacceptable for the children's mother to impose serious upon them. It is the Mother's obligation to secure childcare that does not place the caregivers in danger. Even if the family members currently assuming that risk assert that they do so voluntarily, the Mother's conduct is despicable.
18
For the writer concerned about her sister's unvaccinated children, her mother could be tested for antibodies to see if she is immune to these diseases. If the mother is old enough to have contracted them before vaccines became available, she may very well be immune. I don't know if having lupus means that immunity based on having the disease in childhood is less protective, but it may bring peace of mind to the daughter to know that.
Thus, the ethical dilemma of secretly vaccinating her sister's children goes away. And who knows, when those children get old enough to make their own medical decisions, they may choose vaccinations.
6
While the person asking the vaccination question shouldn't sneak and have the four children vaccinated, it is the right and responsible thing to do to ban the children and their parents from contact with the grandparent.
Deciding not to vaccinate children isn't a decision just between a parent and their innocent children, it's a decision that the parent makes that puts others at risk. In this case, one of the others is the woman's own mother. She is not entitled to endanger her mother while endangering her children.
Lock the door to her and her family. The financial hardship of needing to look elsewhere for babysitters who aren't at risk of life is a hardship the woman took on herself.
19
Beliefs and facts are separable. Assuming the mother of the unvaccinated is not a scientist, medical doctor, or an expert in Infectious Disease and is taking her stand based not on verified facts, she must take responsibility for the unnecessary risk of sickness and death her uninformed actions are creating. While entitled to her beliefs, they do not supersede fact.
16
For the health of the mother with Lupus I would tell the sister that she had to make a choice: vaccinate or take the kids somewhere else. Tough love.
21
@Dan
Ah yes. The voices of the ignorant ring in the land
9
Don’t worry. The childhood diseases that vaccines eradicated are coming back. Happy?
4
The first situation wasn't answered in a heloful way. This is not the place to assemble data on the safety of vaccinations, which is widely available elsewhere.
The issue is what ethical action might might the concerned sister take. There isn't a great deal available. Haaving the children vaccinated behind their mother's back is NEITHER legal NOR ethical.
If the grandmother's treating physicians were consulted, and they advise that the situation does put the grandmother at increased risk of infection, that should be relayed to the anti-vax sister. Stopping contact between the grand mother and kids -- really can only be done if the grandmother is included and concurs with that decision.
Personally, I think this is neglect, and would tell my sister that I was calling in a report. But it might not be considered such, and that, of course would destroy the connection. And it's easier to say when it isn't my sister, or my dilemma.
11
It makes a diff to the ethical question whether the siater who won’t vaccinate the kids has a reasonable fear, or not.
If she had anything close to a reasonable concern, then either the mom and her sister put up with it, or they don’t. Not really much to discuss.
But her fears are silly. That makes a difference, just as it would if she were terrified about space aliens grabbing the kids when they went to visit. So it’s possible to reasonably ask whether the ethical thing to do is to get the kids vaccinated.
And by the way, the sister is also relying on people she’s endangering for child care, based on irrational fears. That’s also an ethical prob, or should be.
5
Regarding the sister who refuses to vaccinate, have titers done for your elderly mother with lupus- at the sister's expense if she wants free babysitting. If titer results show mother is NOT immune to measles, mumps and rubella, have her lupus doctor determine whether she can receive the vaccinations herself. Not everyone with lupus is on steroids all the time--it depends, and if she does get immunized, check her titers again prior to exposing her to the grandchildren. Also ask about whether she should have Shingrix if the grandchildren haven't all already had chicken pox.
15
@Nurse
A child with chicken pox can't trigger a shingles attack in an adult . If the adult has never had chicken pox or received vaccinations against it, the adult can catch chicken pox.
2
@Nurse
100% agree. Plus, it is not even possible to present two children at a clinic and ask to have them vaccinated. They have no medical record at the clinic, the clinic will require proof that you are a parent, or a notarized letter of authorization from a parent. Plus the children may well refuse on their own. You will be turned away in any scenario. Midwest Nurse has it right. Retired Nurse, Peace Corps.
2
@Nurse. What about the flu? That is a dangerous killer of the elderly and I highly doubt she will vaccinate her kids for that.
2
In the anti-vaccine case, the ethical dilemma is different in my opinion from what the author of the column offers. Although the anti-vaccine mother has every right to make decisions for her children, those rights have to be compared with the health risk of those exposed to the children. And if those health risks become greater, than the decision should go in the other direction. Everybody has an obligation to report or do something when the health of a person is endangered. So if you think the children are endangered enough, I would vaccinate them behind the back of the mother. If they are not endangered enough, then don't. If only the health of the lupus-suffering elderly mother is endangered, stop babysitting the children.
20
@Giovanni Ciriani: [ If they are not endangered enough, then don't.]
The danger of harmful side-effects of measles is slight and if they do not live in an area where measles is prevalent, the odds are that they will not contract it.
The potential danger is to the grandmother.
2
It's likely ILLEGAL let alone unethical to vaccinate children when not in your legal care as parent/guardian. And many medical establishments would refuse to allow it unless there was obvious permission from the parent and arrangements made by the parent. You can't quietly get it done and pretend it wasn't and then risk the health of the kids if she were to change her mind and take them for more shots. But I wouldn't go behind her back because it is likely illegal.
29
@JMA2Y Oh, I'm sure the children would never tell their parents!
Just joking.
This whole situation with vaccines is so typical of the way we humans seem to deal with new information, new products. We wait for a body count (as with pesticide usage, asbestos, & lead). So little research has been done on vaccines, and, indeed, as RFK Jr. stated in Albany this week, so little testing has been done on vaccines.
My generation (b. 1940s) went through measles, and it was treated as "normal" childhood disease. This threat of death is so wildly exaggerated! What is the actual history here?
Yet what seems not to be written about is the phenomenon of the measles being spread by children who've received the live vaccine. And now, young mothers who were vaccinated for measles are do not have self-immunization (which they would've had from having had the measles) to pass on to their babies, and so the babies are vulnerable to measles.
I hope that some scientists who get the picture on this unfortunate detour from reality will speak out, do more research, and illuminate the media and the politicians and all of us citizens.
4
it may well be illegal, but I challenge you to articulate how potentially saving lives by averting the irresponsibility of willfull ignorance is unethical.
5
@JMA2Y, good point, but the the solution is simple: vaccinate them and then tell their mother you did it, to avoid the risk of a double vaccination. If you get sued, you have a good case that you acted because of the danger to the children and to the grandmother.
3
It would be very helpful for those of us who deal with friends and relatives who are ant-vaxxers if a short, simple statement could be developed comparing risks versus benefits for usual battery of childhood vaccines. Anti-vaxxers have moved on from autism, as is evident even in this forum. There are risks in any medication. Some will suffer allergic reaction or other side effects. The question is, what are the chances your child will suffer adverse reactions from vaccines versus chances that your kid will die or suffer long-term efffects from disease itself? I realize this is ever-changing because of herd immunity, but this is what needs to be explained — SIMPLY. Also in need of simple explanation: why drug companies are immune from suit over vaccines and why govt has taken on that role. A lot of misinformation about this.
11
@Mary Baker there is no magic short statement that is going to change the mind of an anti-vaxxer. They’ve already heard ALL the arguments and have chosen to ignore science. Pathetic but true
4
For crying out loud, they give you such a statement every time you go see about shots. And WebMD, CDC, Mayo Clinic...do they not have the Internet where you live?
2
@Mary Baker
The anti-vaxxers are beyond logic. They may have to experience the loss of a child to measles before they will even consider the merits of vaccination. Most of them are too young to remember what measles was like before vaccines became available.
1
The second letter.
I received a letter - this was pre-internet - from a friend I hadn’t heard from in many years. He had no family. This brilliant man was clearly disturbed, claiming the CIA was monitoring his computer usage. He had shown signs of mental illness when I had been in contact with him previously. A number of us who had been his friends got similar letters.
I contacted local mental health officials near where he was living. They reported back to me that they had knocked on his door, but because he was lucid, there was nothing they could do. I don’t know if he was danger to himself. If a person is sane enough to use a computer and is otherwise not harming themselves or anyone else, there’s nothing that can be done.
13
@GiGi: A similar thing happened to me.
A friend from college showed up at my door in the early morning with an unpaid cabbie.
I went to the hospital with his mother and had him committed. He was released three days later. About a week after that, I got a letter from him from a mental hospital in Montreal; they released him after a few days, too.
2
@Gigi, your brilliant friend is mistaken. The CIA is not monitoring his computer use, it's actually the NSA working in conjunction with British intelligence agencies that monitor all electronic communications in the US. Thought you should know.
3
Of course LW1 can't have her sister's children vaccinated without her consent. No matter how clearly beneficial for them, it's simply beyond the authority of anyone but their parents.
LW1 and her mother are, of course, free to cut off contact with the children, but that may not be necessary. LW1's mother probably had measles as a child and may still have immunity notwithstanding her compromised immune system; her doctor can test for that. If she has immunity, and LW1 has been vaccinated (or can do so now), cutting of contact with her grandchildren is most likely only to deny LW1's mother a source of pleasure. If she does not have immunity and cannot be vaccinated because of her health, the risk of being with children who have not been vaccinated may simply be too great. It seems to me that the first step is a consultation with the mother's doctor about these issues.
91
@Joel. I agree. Even a previous vaccination might not have conferred immunity — I only had my own checked because it was a routine prental screening. Prior to that, I assumed the booster I had at 16 had done its job. And many probably never got that booster. Better for the mother and the author of the letter to know the state of their own immunity.
9
@Joel
Don't read something into it that clearly is not there.
"My mother ... implored my sister to reconsider her anti-vaccination stance. We have told her that if she doesn’t, we will have to stop watching her children ... "
Grandmother's on board, so, no, it's her choice to "cut off contact". Why consult Grandma's doctor, anyway? There's a whiff of presumption here that an elderly woman can't figure this out for herself.
She has. Read again more closely.
13
@Joel
The mother's therapy for her lupus will very likely have compromised her immune system. Even if she once had immunity [prior disease or vaccination], her immune response to a new challenge cannot be relied upon. Yes, there are tests, but they are quantitative [levels of antibodies to a particular disease-causing virus or bacteria], but only weakly predictive [except at the extremes of measurement] of an individual's ability to mount an appropriate immune response. Think of a credit card account. I may have an outstanding balance this month of $5,000. I want to make a purchase of $5,000. Is this a prudent decision? Depends. What if my credit limit is $10,000. What if it's $100,000? What is my after-tax monthly income and other expenses -> the ability to replenish that credit?
3
Measles are in the news, but it is the flu that would pose the greater risk to the grandmother with lupus. Grandma, letter writer, and other family members should have the flu shot every year. And, all caregivers of young children should update their immunizations, including DTaP vaccine.
The letter writer asked the wrong question. She should have asked whether it would be ethical for her to misrepresent herself as parent or guardian to the vaccine clinicians, lie on the permission slips, and then tell children to keep quiet. Nope.
36
I'm confused. Just how does LW1 propose to vaccinate her sister children 1) without her finding out and 2) without her permission? I'm almost inclined to believe this letter is a fake intended to pose a seemingly difficult ethical dilemma.
Unless the sister's four kids are quadruplets under the age of two, they're absolutely going to tell their mother what happened. And, of course, there is the fact that you have to sign legal permission papers (stating that you are aware of and assume any risk) whenever you or someone you have legal guardianship of receives a vaccine. She would either have to lie or forge her sister's signature (and get the four kids to remember to call her "mom" while doing so). The whole thing is completely untenable, so is not actually an interesting problem.
39
You can't get these kids vaccinated. You aren't their legal guardian.
If you take these kids to their regular healthcare provider, you'll need documentation authorizing you--with the parents' consent. And if you take them to a new healthcare provider, you'll need proof of guardianship.
Healthcare providers can be sued for providing non-emergency healthcare without legal consent of the parent or guardian.
So think of it this way--what you're proposing is illegal, won't happen anyway, and people can get sued for it.
Try again to approach your sister with the perfectly rationale viewpoint that her unvaccinated kids are putting your mother at serious risk.
18
Did you think of asking your mom's doctor what risk she is actually facing? Chances are, she had measles and mumps as a kid and thus is immune to at least those diseases.
14
@Wesley If she had had measles and mumps (and other typical childhood infectious diseases of her day), it is likely that any immunity she developed as a result would now be impaired by her current lupus plus possible immunosuppressive treatment she receives for it.
18
@Wesley - Why not ask the doctor(s) to order a blood test which checks whether you're immune to measles. My recent blood test shows that I am & and that's because I had measles as a child== many, many decades ago. I have other health challenges, but I'm not going to add to my problems by getting any unneeded injection.
@Wesley Patients with lupus may maintain immunity to these diseases when they are not very sick. But if they are put on immunosuppressive drugs in order to combat flares of the disease, they become susceptible to many diseases irrespective of their theoretical immunity.
7
I would politely advise her that because of your mothers malady's and in HER best interest, you nor your mother can no longer babysit her children...and let her figure it out. Clearly, she is considering the risk she is putting your mother in, so why should you ride the guilt train about her children. Some people just have to learn the hard way.
78
LW#1: Tell your sister about the free vaccinations, and inform her you can no longer take care of her children if she doesn't get them vaccinated. Then it is her problem. You are not authorized to vaccinate the children; in fact, it may be the basis for a criminal charge. If any of the children have a reaction, you will be found out and responsible.
61
@Marilyn Sue Michel. These vaccines are already a covered benefit because of the Affordable Care Act — all the standard childhood vaccines, the flu shot, shingles vaccine, hepatitis, etc etc. No need to go to a free event or special clinic. Given how many shots these children have not received, it would be wise, should full vaccination be the goal, for their regular doctor to work with them to develop a plan of how to accomplish that.
11
Thank you for the new word! We seem to be experiencing an epidemic of "anosognosia" in this country right now. No doubt it has something to do with the trend to self-educate at Google University. It certainly makes the victim resistant to reason. I am pessimistic about the chances of a cure.
37
@Bystander
As a physician but not a neurologist, I had to go to a reference source to verify my impression; anosognosia refers to a condition resulting from actual brain damage, whereas "denial" is a much more common condition.
6
This lady is denying her children medical care and education. What about their rights?
I had a childhood friend who died (slowly) of an easily treatable disease because of her parents' religious objections to treatment. She would absolutely be alive today if not for her parents' "rights." It has been thirty years, and I can picture her face and hear her voice like it was yesterday.
The right to treat other people as your property - to keep them in ignorance or inflict sickness and suffering - just because of their age and a custodial relationship? I find it obscene.
We take people's children away if the parents beat them. Measles will do the damage and cause the pain of a very severe beating indeed, but we are fine with that somehow.
215
Interesting perspective. It doesn’t seem to occur to anti-vaxxers that they are essentially preventing their children access to a safety net that would prevent pain. I would think that also the pro-lifers would be more offended by the anti-vax movement based on your perspective, but that does not seem to be the case. Definitely food for thought! I hope my sweet, sensitive son never has to witness a classmate suffering from a preventable, devastating illness.
45
@Arvind. I am sorry for your loss. It is worth noting that in some other countries, children are taken away and effectively vaccination is mandatory.
23
Exactly. You've not only made the point that should always be first and foremost in a situation like this, but have written what I was about to.
That said, I would add that the overflowing arguments warning of breaking custodian laws as the de facto reason to not get the children vaccinated in this case is the opposite of an ethical position - and therefore so is the response given by the columnist.
in what I see as a civilized culture, laws are ideally the embodiment of ethical commitments. With the above-mentioned responses, however, it seems that our values are rapidly descending from the value of individuality to the sole belief in self protection.
Moreover, would those warning to avoid breaking custodian laws in this circumstance remain so certain if anti-vaxxing leads to an increasing rate not only of infection (as it is already clearly doing) but of pprobabilistically near-inevitable deaths?
I most certainly hope not.
6
No, you can’t get the kids vaccinated. But you can and should cut off physical contact with them and your sister for the sake of your mother’s health.
Anti-vaxxers are public enemies and should be treated as such. They have the potential to do far more harm to us than the enemy combatants in our recent ill-conceived wars. They should remember that in today’s cyber world nothing is lost or forgotten, and that their individual identities will be available to the victims of any epidemic they might abet. And to the families and survivors.
78
@AD
There's the question of intent: Somebody who inadvertently doesn't get their vaccinations updated is not a public enemy but somebody who purposely puts the public at risk by not vaccinating their children is indeed a public enemy, and they should get used to the label.
Of course, IMO anti-vaxxers are mentally ill and are suffering from a group delusion, so there's that mitigating circumstance. But when a delusion takes root, there is no rationally talking somebody out of it (as in the LW whose friend thinks the CIA is after her), so I agree with those who say it's hopeless to try to talk the mother around. She should just be cut off from the family. She can find a kindred spirit to care for the kids (because having four down with measles at once will be a real challenge).
19
@AD Was typhoid Mary a public enemy? Yes she was!
If you know for a fact that the two children you saw were injured by vaccine then they were very unlucky and will have been compensated to the extent it is possible.
If an unvaccinated carrier of disease gets on a train and infects someone that person just gets very ill.
My wife's practice had several such people whose only exposure was a commuter train to NY.
Perhaps closing public transport to the unvaccinated might help persuade them.
10
@AD: [What about a vaccine-injured child who suffers from transverse myelitis and partial paralysis? I just saw a child like this. And another vaccine-injured child with a seizure disorder.]
Anecdotal.
2
I'd ban your Pro Pandemic, ableist sister and her Outbreak kids from visiting.
Your sister is using your services strictly for ease and economic reasons (being cheap).
Let her find some other Pro Pandemic mom and let them trade off baby sitting services. You really do have the power here.
You will never forgive yourself if your mother comes down with a preventable disease. You sister is selfish and doesn't care.
Since your sister considers Autsim a fate worse than death, and no regard for your mother's health, I believe the choice is easy.
You have no legal right to get those kids vaccinated, and legally can get into trouble. Don't argue with your sister. When you argue with crazy, they drag you down to their level and beat them with experience.
At least with the ban, she can go wounded Mama Bear on social media about "the unfairness of it all" for a good month.
124
So because anti-vaxxers just believe they are correct their stupidity should put everyone else at risk?!?
There is NO evidence that vaccines cause ANY of the issues they say, but we need to respect their naiveté? If anyone I know expresses an anti-vax ideology, they are confronted then and there and their ideology never does stand in the face of hard facts. I do not understand this issue, as it moves beyond what I would consider allowable lack of knowledge, into willful ignorance, which is unacceptable.
86
@Jose
Everyone else?? Not everyone, only those who aren't vaccinated and/or whose vaccine doesn't work anymore.
1
@Jose That's not what he said. He said that it would be unethical (probably illegal) to take the kids an get them shots w/o their mother's approval. Most of his answer was basically an explanation of why vaccinations are good and safe.
8
@John Who are the unvaccinated people? Many are babies that are not old enough yet to get the shots. The rest are people like the mother of the letter writer. The rest are the children of parents who believe in this anti-vaccination nonsense.
2
LW1: What about the ethics of the sister?
She's freeloading off what's left of herd immunity to protect her unvaccinated children from the risk of disease, disability and death. She's putting her own mother -- a vulnerable adult because of her age, illness and compromised immune system -- at risk for the same. She's failing to protect her children and guilty of neglect. She's not paying market rate for the babysitting, since it would be a "significant hardship" if LW1 and the mother stopped providing the service, so she's exploiting her family members. In several ways, the sister is living a parasitic lifestyle.
LW1 says she doesn't want to alienate her sister. I'm all for family harmony, but when one family member is using another as a doormat, it's more important to stand up for the doormat's rights in a healthy, assertive way. Otherwise, the bad behavior is likely to become even worse.
No, of course LW1 has no right to innoculate the children without their mother's consent; it would be a criminal assault and tortious battery. The fact that she's even considering such a measure indicates LW1 is already experiencing a high level of frustration and outrage at her sister's behavior. Such feelings are understandable, given the sister's unethical behavior. But if LW1 doesn't try to confront the sister in an assertive way, it's likely that her feelings will soon cause her to erupt in anger. That result would be more likely to cause the alienation she seeks to avoid.
130
It’s not legal to do this, but if I were LW1 I would try to get the kids vaccinated anyway (and just sign the forms as if I were their legal guardian). There’s a good chance that the clinic won’t realize that there’s a problem. If the kids are old enough, possibly they could understand that it’s best just not to mention it to Mom. Yeah, it’s also not good to encourage kids to keep secrets from their parents — but maybe the kids catch on that sometimes it’s best just not to bring some topics up. All depends on the age of the kids. Then once the kids are vaccinated, what’s their mom gonna do? Be mad? Okay, be mad. Press charges? Unlikely, but LW1 would have a lot of supporters. The most likely worst outcome is that the sister cuts contact with LW1, so no more babysitting duties. And the kids have at least some protection against disease (although ideally they probably should get additional shots after the first one).
6
@BJR Irrespective of the problem of vaccinations, saying that cutting contact with a sibling means no more babysitting duties trivializes family relationships.
9
@Aleksandra Putting a parent/grandparent with a compromised immune system at risk trivializes family relationships.
22
@Aleksandra In this case the sister has trivialized family relationships by refusing something that would protect her own mother.
Who needs a sister like that around??
32
These kinds of articles always bring out those advocating a "reasonable middle path" of delaying vaccines. Unfortunately, this strategy has been proven to actually increase risks while providing no benefit. The CDC knows what they're talking about on this one, vaccinate on schedule!
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/delaying-vaccines-increases-risks-with-no-added-benefits/
52
As the primary caregiver for her elderly mother who has lupus, LW1 has an ethical obligation to limit health risks her mother might face. That means not allowing unvaccinated children into her mother's home.
LW1 and her mother should stop babysitting the sister's children.
405
@Lucy Silverstein
Proof, please?
33
@Kj Anecdotal, no doubt. Her friend's mom's teacher got lupus immediately after getting vaccinated. What more proof do you need?
24
@Brian
My patient was about to get her Shingles vaccine in our office but put it off because she was going on a vacation. A few days later, she got shingles. Had she had the vaccine, she would have certainly believed the vaccine gave her shingles!
16
Sisters Kids : Until all of the Children are fully Vaccinated, refuse to have them in your Home, and around your Mother. See how long your Sisters
" beliefs " last when see must PAY for childcare. Do it, for your Mother, AND for the Kids. No delays, no excuses, no compromise.
324
@Phyliss Dalmatian
If I were to engage in snark and passive aggression, I might tell the sister that I have converted to the worship of Moloch, and am about to do my odly duty to sacrifice a child once in a while. When she gets properly horrified , as she should, tell her that her position against vaccination is hardly different, and try again to convince her that her concerns are baseless. A fool's errand, I know, but perhaps the economic stick of childcare costs might just do the trick.
10
You miss the idea that this is a fraudulent FB account, a clone.
Using someone's picture and i.d. to create a fake FB account is a frequent tactic.
17
The sister of the anti-vaxxer should not proceed with this course of action because she might also potentially be criminally liable for assault and battery. I certainly support her rationale, however, and absolutely hate that her sister would put others’ health in jeopardy, and particularly her mother’s. It is crazy-making! Perhaps this column can sometime address some of the current proposals for governments themselves to force-vaccinate. And how these parents ought to be legally responsible themselves for negligence or child abuse as if they refused life-saving medical treatment for their child...
9
I dunno, but it seems bizarre to me that the kids themselves, who might end up with devastating illness, have no ability to opt out of bad parenting in terms of getting immunizations. Lotsa folks talk about the rights of the unborn, but here's a case were an actual person is being put in harm's way with no ability to intervene on their own behalf. Seems 100% crazy.
190
@Matthew
We should be clear - the right-to-life begins at conception and ends at birth. Since these are children, not fetuses, they have no rights to medical treatment.
54
I love this.
2
@Matthew There are several states where young teens can get vaccinations over the objections of their parents. I was surprised to hear about these laws, some even in conservative states.
"The 15 states include Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Washington, and West Virginia.
If you are under-18 and not living in one of these states, it’s worth talking to your school nurse who will be able to advise you on your options and might be able to talk to your parents."
(From IFLScience!)
7
Many States, oh, all states, have organizations which react to parental abuse of children. Ordinarily, nothing could be done about something like refusing to vaccinate a child, HOWEVER, where an Epidemic has been declared, a Child Protective Organization can act to protect the children. Google the ones in your area and see what they can do.
Oh, and get your mother out of that house immediately based upon her condition, then call her PCP and get his take on the situation.
Good luck!
18
@Joel Friedlander
Just thinking -- a huge uptick in reports to Child Protective Agencies of at risk unvaccinated children might trigger an awakening in state governments, and then in legislatures, of the need to establish clear and firm statutes.
2
I am pretty sure this question will receive a lot of rabid comments from pro and antivaxxers that in no way address the question being asked.
No, no matter how dumb her sister is LW1 can't have the children innocculated, but she can keep these kids away from her and her Mother. End of story. It is probably a moot point anyway if she is not the children's official guardian she probably can't get them vaccinated.
76
@Marti Mart
The ethics of the anti-vax sister would interest me as well though. Would the situation change if one of the kids requested vaccination and aunt wanted to take him/her to the doctor to facilitate it? I feel there are some interesting questions that could be explored further. Since the second question was weak, I wish more time had been spent exploring this question.
5
The Anti-Vaccination mother must be made to understand that, by denying vaccination to her children, she and they become carriers of a contagious disease. End.
14
LW1; You knew before writing to The Ethicist that vaccinating these children against their Mother's wishes would be considered wrong by most. Never-the-less, I urge you to take them for vaccinations this minute, for their own sake, even if she never speaks to you again!
11
@wschloss I agree. It may be unethical but their health and the health of others they encounter depends upon it. In this case, ethics are unimportant.
5
As others have noted, it is the sister of LW1 who is not only selfish in putting her immune compromised mother at risk of serious illness, but she is apparently oblivious to same (in addition to the health hazards to which her own children are exposed as a result of her position on vaccinations). Evidently, free babysitting services blind this ethically challenged person from considering even the imminent health dangers of a close relative. Although LW1 cannot take the children to be vaccinated, she can assuredly take action to protect her mother and should do so immediately.
18
No no no! The answer to unethical behavior is not reactive unethical action!
The correct response is to discontinue baby sitting the children to protect grandma’s health. The end.
Or maybe.... explain to the children that they are a danger to their beloved grandma, that’s why they can’t visit. I wonder what sister would say to them to explain it...
16
Wish you had specified what the LEGAL repercussions would be if the aunt had the kids vaccinated....You made it sound "morally wrong" which may be true, but also not the point in the this situation.
I would give the mom an ultimatum after which you and grandma will no longer watch the kids. You are enabling her bizarre beliefs otherwise, and endangering the grandmother.
Second LW: Not much you can do about someone in the midst of a mental breakdown. I do hope no one is actually sending her money!
12
@RLiss The column is called "The Ethicist," and the writer is a philosophy professor. It's not a legal column.
7
You need to stop watching the children now. Your mother could suffer a serious setback that is preventable.
158
LW1, stop putting your mother at risk. She should not be in the same enclosed space as your sister's children, and if you are going to be interacting with your mother within a few hours, you should not either.
I congratulate the public schools for refusing vaccinated children. It gives me hope that the vaccination rates where you live are sufficiently high that your sister's irresponsibility is not likely to harm others.
As noted, depending on the age of her children, the likelihood of them developing autism is effectively zero. The chances of encephalitis, blindness, permanent disability, or even death from measles (or other preventable infections) is higher. Moreover, if one of her children were infected with measles, the chance of more than one becoming infected is relatively high.
If you live in an older city, perhaps you should take a trip to a cemetery with your sister and her children. Have them look at the number of child graves prior to vaccines, Then look at a portion of the cemetery that is newer. Ask them if they know any children now who have died from infectious diseases. Step away from the internet and take a look at reality.
65
Seems the ethical question is allowing children to be exposed to deadly diseases based on her beliefs. The ethicist likes to default to laws and social norms instead of confronting the fact that the children are being mistreated.
22
Letter #2 is not an ethics question. It is an advice question dressed as an ethics question, and Appiah essentially provides an advice column.
This column is best when it addresses ethical questions that are interesting, maybe even polarizing. It is at its worst when it posts questions with obvious answers or, worse yet, when Appiah gives advice instead of focusing on ethics.
The answer to letter #2 could’ve been succinctly limited to one sentence.
12
@Abc123 And most responses to Letter #1 are turning into a battle of whether or not to vaccinate ; not whether a non-parent/ non-guardian may go against a parent's wishes and whether a caregiver may endanger their charge.
2
@Abc123 The ethics question is: Am I obligated to try to help a former acquaintance, or am I ethically allowed to ignore it.
The answer about the ethics is: "In sum: No, you’re not obliged to act."
(He does overlap with legal questions, Dear Abby, and Miss Manners at times.)
5
I am confused; as the primary caregiver for an elderly parent with a further compromised immune system, the decision TO PROTECT THE MOST VULNERABLE seems to be relatively easy.
This includes protecting her from the flu, stomach viruses, and other communicable illnesses. We aren't even mentioning illnesses like the measles. Yet.
I am assuming that the mother has received the maximum amount of vaccinations safe for her, and that it isn't at a level that would encourage contact with potential carriers of illnesses.
Why is babysitting the children of a healthy adult more important than safeguarding the health of an already ill family member? Avoiding alienating a sibling seems more important to the writer. Perhaps there is $$ involved in providing babysitting?
BTW, being sneaky isn't the answer either.
53
@Cathy: In answer to your concern about the mother, live attenuated vaccines (such as the Measles.Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine) are contraindicated for immunosuppressed people.
Also, vaccination during one's childhood (measles is primarily a childhood disease) does not necessarily protect against catching it (if you're immunosuppressed) in adulthood. Most immunosuppressed adults are protected because of herd immunity, which greatly lowers the chances of encountering a nasty bug in the first place.
6
LW#1, as her primary caregiver, your first obligation is to your mother. Is she at risk of contracting measles or any other communicable disease such as a cold or stomach bug from her grandchildren? A simple blood titer test can determine her immune levels for MMR. If she is at risk, you should refuse any person-to-person interaction with your sister and her children until they have received all available immunizations and are healthy. No one will be happy, but you will at least be protecting your mother.
43
The sister can't get her sisters' children vaccinated. Only the parent or legal guardian can do that. No clinic will administer shots or other medical procedures to children without parental consent.
10
@K C DeMott Exactly. This whole situation is based on a false premise. The anti-vax sister could easily sue not only her sister, but the HC provider that administered the vaccines for allowing an unauthorized party to exert parental control. She would win, and win plenty.
4
@Sundevilpeg
I'm assuming the aunt would be smart enough to lie and say she is the kid's mom. Medical professionals can't be expected to be psychic and know the aunt is lying. If aunt and mom have the same last name, even if they ask for ID, it wont matter. Aunt should not do it, but I am sure people lie to get kids medical treatment sometimes. Heck, I have never been asked for my ID when bringing my son to the doctor.
4
LW1 - trying to end the debate about vaccines seems a harder task than following through on the decision to stop watching the children if they are not vaccinated. While the latter would no doubt be difficult, it is the right step to protect your mother. Perhaps it will end the debate for your sister. Best of luck with it.
60
For LW1: I agree that all children should be vaccinated against common childhood diseases. I nearly died of measles and had to be hospitalized in 1946, long before the vaccines existed.
But it would be unethical to get the nieces and nephews vaccinated behind their mother's back. This is after all a column about ethics.
The sister appears to be driven both by irrational and refuted fear of autism and also the belief that she has the right to refuse to have her children vaccinated despite the threat this causes to family members and others.
Let me suggest an argument that I've used with an acquaintance: "If you have the right expose harm to others by refusing to vaccinate your children, do you also give yourself the right to drive drunk? As a member of society, why do you think you have a "right" to expose other members of society to danger or possible death?"
21
You have no right to get your sister's kids vaccinated, so don't. You DO have a right to refuse to babysit the kids around your mother.
Like most interpersonal relationship conflicts, focus on what YOU can (and have the right to) control, and let the other people deal with the consequences.
Anti-vaxxers should not bear the consequences of their decisions, just like the rest of us. If it means no free babysitter, or no admittance to some schools--so be it. That said, most anti-vaxxers will accept those consequences rather than change their minds. That's their right. But it is completely unethical, and a major violation of her trust, to get the kids unvaccinated given her very clear opinion on the matter.
Barring abuse/neglect, parents have the right to make decisions about their children, if others vehemently disagree with those decisions.
18
The first letter-writer and her elderly mother should just refuse to watch the unvaccinated kids.
I have a feeling the sister would overcome her objections to vaccination once she has to start paying for childcare elsewhere.
216
@Ashley
This. But also make sure the sister knows why they are refusing--not only to protect their own health, but also because isolating anti-vaxxers from society in general is the only thing left to do to protect _others_ with damaged immune systems. I would do that on principle, even though I am not immunocompromised. Dangerous behavior may still be legal, but it should be socially discouraged.
73
@UA
This is spot on. My son will never meet his second cousins, as they do not vaccinate. I refuse to socialize with anti-vaxers as a matter of principle.
121
@Kj A matter of principle or practicality? Those are different things.
Practical: I don't want my kids to get sick and die, so they won't be around their cousins.
Principle: They disagree with me, so I won't socialize with them.
7