With such differing opinions what is a parent to do. On 3rd November 2003 Molly and Isabelle were born by caesarean section in Kingston Hospital. After five days my partner Janette was able to come home. For the first month we had regular visits from our health visitor who provided support and advice. She gave us the Red book which charts a child’s development and the vaccination schedule and made the girls appointments for the DPT vaccination at 4 weeks.
She was very surprised to be told we were not going to vaccinate the girls. Perhaps if they cut themselves tetanus may be necessary or, if there is a risk of polio or diphtheria when travelling abroad we would consider vaccinations. I had mumps and measles as a child and it was a week off school, inconvenient for my grandmother and our GP but not life threatening, in fact I suspect having these childhood illnesses primed my immature immune system and is one of the reasons I have only taken antibiotics once in my life and enjoyed good health for 48 years. After puberty we would advise the girls (and all responsible females) to have rubella vaccination.
At first the health visitor tried to reassure me, but realising I had read much on the subject and was in the middle of writing a dissertation for my masters in health promotion at Brunel University “Are Parents Making An Informed Decision When Their Children Receive DPT Vaccination”? she let it slide. Nevertheless I presented her with a challenge, to produce evidence that would show that vaccinated children were healthier than unvaccinated children and find a doctor who could guarantee that my children would not experience serious neurological damage from the vaccine. Molly and Isabelle are much older now and I have heard nothing more.
Monday 26 of January 1998 Sally Clarke’s son Harry has his DPT vaccination, (Stolen Innocence: A mothers Fight for Justice – The Story of Sally Clark ,by John Batt. Ebury press 2004) A few hours later Harry was dead (page 36). Unfortunately for Sally Clarke she had no plausible explanation as to why her son had died. Clark was convicted of killing Harry and his brother Christopher, she spent three years in prison and was finally acquitted by the court of Appeal in 2003.
Soon after her conviction in February 2000 Sally Clark’s family were contacted by Oliva Price, Pat Child and Yvonne Bye, campaigners on the dangers of vaccination. “They have no doubt that the DPT jab given to Harry four hours before he died is what killed him” (page 226). They support their view with a mountain of paper. “none of Sallys medical expert’s will give this theory the time of day”
In April 2000 the Clark family find an expert in the US and commission Professor John Menkes, a paediatric neurologist to write a report. The Clarks are encouraged by Menkes report which suggested that the vaccine was a possible cause of Harry’s death ((page 228). This would surely be been enough to create reasonable doubt in the minds of any jury. Unfortunately none of the Clark’s British medical experts have doubts, they remain convinced DPT could not be a possible cause of Harrys death. The appeal fails.
In August 2001 epidemiologist professor Tom Meade tells the Clarkes that he is prepared to make a full investigation of vaccination in both babies. August 2002 Tom Meade’s report says “vaccination could have killed Harry” (page 297). “he has no doubt that that the pertussis part of the vaccine could have killed the baby. He explains that a cause of death is not an exact science; it can only ever be a matter of opinion. If the vaccine did not kill Harry, it would have exacerbated the effect of the bacteria “ Staaphylococcus aureus which was found in microbiological samples taken from Harry during the post-mortem. This was not revealed to the jury during the trial and was the reason for the success of the appeal in January 2003.
On top of the MMR controversy, it would have been a disaster for vaccination uptake if DPT had been suggested as a cause of death in this high profile case. Nevertheless the DPT vaccine was withdrawn eighteen months later and replaced with another multiple vaccine which does not contain the controversial preservative thimerosal (mercury).
The Sally Clarke story has certain similarities to a description given to me by a parent whose son had an immediate reaction to the DPT jab “My three month old son had extremely high temperature, went white, and then floppy. He was rushed into Kingston hospital and later diagnosed with sepsus. One month later he had his second DTP jab and experienced the same reaction”. The mother put two and two together and like Sally Clarke was told by doctors that she was wrong, “ The vaccine is safe. The reaction was coincidental”.
Some people would say I am irresponsible, am being selfish, a bad parent to put my children at “risk” by not giving them the DPT. They would say I only get away with it because the majority have their children vaccinated and in doing so protect Isabelle and Molly from getting these “life threatening diseases”. I can only say I am doing what I believe is best for my children as any good parent would do. I have no doubt the risk from the disease has been exaggerated and the risk from the vaccines minimised to promote a policy that is cost effective, the NHS does not have the capacity for GP,s to go out and visit all the children that would be sick and contagious. There is also the cost to the economy of parents who have to stay at home from work.
There is no doubt vaccination has played a role in reducing morbidity of what were once called normal childhood illness, but there is no evidence children are now healthier or less likely to die from illness because they have been vaccinated.
Perhaps mandatory vaccination programmes are a form of social control that helps maintain the social strata within society, by preventing conditions that highlight inequalities in society, such as poverty, poor diet, poor education, housing and low self esteem. Is it possible that correcting these factors would be more likely to have an effect on the health of British children rather than vaccination? I lived in Denmark for 12 years and I was happy to pay 50% tax for better public services, I am not happy to vaccinate Molly and Isabelle because it is not politically popular to raise taxes. MRSA is a far bigger threat to health than measles ever was and is prevented by good hygiene and principles promoted by Florence Nightingale which have been neglected in the search for cutting costs and a pharmaceutical panacea.
The obligation to “do no harm” has been central to medical conduct since ancient time, yet iatrogenic illness – literally illness or injury that is induced by the physician has now come to be recognised as a risk factor in health care delivery.
A report published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1998, estimated that 106,000 Americans die each year as a result of adverse reactions to prescription medications. This figure represents three times the number of people killed by automobiles and is the fourth leading cause of death in the United States. Only heart disease, cancer, and stroke kill more Americans than adverse reactions to drugs. Aylin et al.(2004) suggested in The British Medical Journal that an estimated 850 000 medical errors occur in NHS hospitals every year resulting in 40 000 deaths.
One would hope that the risk versus benefit ratio is explained to people before they undergo any kind of medical intervention, especially in relation to small children. Failures in this process is what led to the Bristol Inquiry 2002. With this in mind while doing my masters I decided to investigate what parents of vaccinated children actually knew about the first vaccine given to their children, diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus (DPT). I surveyed 200 people to see if they knew what DPT stood for and if they had been given any information about possible risks associated with the vaccination. The study was passed by the local regional ethics committee. I have not gone into the methodology of the study here and its limitations, simply because in my view the study raises more questions than provides answers.
DPT was the first vaccination given to children at four weeks until August 2004 when it was changed to a new multiple vaccine which included polio. The aim of my study was to assess basic immunisation knowledge of parents who have had their children vaccinated with DPT.
I wished to examine the notion that parents who vaccinate their children are well informed (Hinman, 2000)and those who refuse are not and to determine if the information provided to parents conformed to the guidelines for the “ethical considerations of seeking patients consent” General Medical Council (GMC, 1998).
The main finding was that 60% of parents who responded (48% response rate) did not even know DPT stood for ,therefore it was easy to conclude that they lacked the knowledge and the information to give informed consent for their children to be vaccinated with DPT. Interestingly 100% knew what MMR stood for.
I have referenced all the main statements in the piece with the name of the author and year of publication, This makes it harder to read but I want people to read the articles for themselves in the medical literature.. The exact reference is available in the Bibliography in the link on the table of contents.
Please make your comments in the discussion section of the site, or correct me if you think my facts are not accurate so I can investigate further.