So. Keep my mouth shut? Be discrete? Or turtles?

ashley8918 · April 2015

LakeR2014 said:

ashley8918 said:

LakeR2014 said:
This question came up hypothetically during a conversation and the response from an antivaxer was: 'Well do you know the vaccine status of everyone at your wedding? Where everyone has been in the last month and whether or not they've been out of country and had the necessary quarantine periods? If not, then you're signalling out my kids and that's not fair.'

I was dumbfounded by her reasoning as her questions were reasons as to why her kids SHOULD have vaccines, but whatever.    She posed another good question though - you specifically know that her kid is unvaccinated but do you know that all of your other guests are vaccinated? Are you willing to ask?   If not, then you are singling out the one child and family.

If the mom of the twins takes her kids out of the house, to the store, to the doctors office, etc, she's risking them coming in contact with un-vaccinated people all the time.   We had some un-vaccinated kids at our wedding and everyone who had other children were aware of it, because the mom is vocal about it. As my brother, who had a 4 year old and 10 month old there stated 'I can protect my kids as much as possible by getting them vaccinated, but I refuse to isolate them because of other's stupidity.'     Let the parents of other children, specifically the twins know, and let them make the decision.   Because ultimately it's their children and their decision.

No, she is not "singling out" that child. He (she?) poses a KNOWN risk to those babies (and to fucking everyone). The argument that a known risk should be ignored because there MIGHT be unknown risks is stupid logic.

Let's say that Johnny has decided that he is going to kill the president. The Whatevergovernmentagency has become aware of this. Should they not eliminate this risk (by stopping him/arresting him/whatever) just because there are maybe, and very probably, other people dead set on icing the president?

It's a complete logical fallacy.
Your argument is way off base. Seriously? You're equating a known, definite threat to the possibility of a threat?   I understand your argument, but the above example is taking it to a high extreme.

As to known - it's not a known risk. She poses a possible risk. Does the OP know that the unvaccinated child was in the area where exposure happened? Or is she going off of a news report she read from the area? Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?

My point above was that the child is unvaccinated, yes, and may have a possible risk. But unless the OP knows the medical history and whereabouts of all of their guests they cannot fully protect the twins, she can just inform and allow the parents of the twins to make their own decision.

For the record, I'm all for vaccines and think those opposed to them are on their own personal high-horse, belong in a loony bin, or are out to get attention.

No, it isn't. We know from the OP that the child lives in an area where an outbreak occurred. But even if we didn't know this, my point still stands.

It is absolutely a known risk. Being unvaccinated is an inherent risk.

Do we know for sure that the child has the measles? Nope. But being unvaccinated in itself is a known risk.

Do we know for sure that Johnny will try to kill the president? Nope. Maybe he changes his mind. Maybe he was just saying it to sound cool. But he is still a known risk because he said it.

LakeR2014 · April 2015

mikenberger said:

LakeR2014 said:

ashley8918 said:

LakeR2014 said:
This question came up hypothetically during a conversation and the response from an antivaxer was: 'Well do you know the vaccine status of everyone at your wedding? Where everyone has been in the last month and whether or not they've been out of country and had the necessary quarantine periods? If not, then you're signalling out my kids and that's not fair.'

I was dumbfounded by her reasoning as her questions were reasons as to why her kids SHOULD have vaccines, but whatever.    She posed another good question though - you specifically know that her kid is unvaccinated but do you know that all of your other guests are vaccinated? Are you willing to ask?   If not, then you are singling out the one child and family.

If the mom of the twins takes her kids out of the house, to the store, to the doctors office, etc, she's risking them coming in contact with un-vaccinated people all the time.   We had some un-vaccinated kids at our wedding and everyone who had other children were aware of it, because the mom is vocal about it. As my brother, who had a 4 year old and 10 month old there stated 'I can protect my kids as much as possible by getting them vaccinated, but I refuse to isolate them because of other's stupidity.'     Let the parents of other children, specifically the twins know, and let them make the decision.   Because ultimately it's their children and their decision.

No, she is not "singling out" that child. He (she?) poses a KNOWN risk to those babies (and to fucking everyone). The argument that a known risk should be ignored because there MIGHT be unknown risks is stupid logic.

Let's say that Johnny has decided that he is going to kill the president. The Whatevergovernmentagency has become aware of this. Should they not eliminate this risk (by stopping him/arresting him/whatever) just because there are maybe, and very probably, other people dead set on icing the president?

It's a complete logical fallacy.
Your argument is way off base. Seriously? You're equating a known, definite threat to the possibility of a threat?   I understand your argument, but the above example is taking it to a high extreme.

As to known - it's not a known risk. She poses a possible risk. Does the OP know that the unvaccinated child was in the area where exposure happened? Or is she going off of a news report she read from the area? Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?

My point above was that the child is unvaccinated, yes, and may have a possible risk. But unless the OP knows the medical history and whereabouts of all of their guests they cannot fully protect the twins, she can just inform and allow the parents of the twins to make their own decision.

For the record, I'm all for vaccines and think those opposed to them are on their own personal high-horse, belong in a loony bin, or are out to get attention.

If you had read my OP I clearly stated:

The child lives in an area where there is a measles outbreak but is not exhibiting or has come into contact with it to my knowledge. (And the outbreak is not of the same caliber as the recent Disneyland outbreak)

The mother of the twins will be discussing with her husband how best to proceed. She thanked me for the heads up and appreciated my looking out for her boys. Now I feel like punching the cousin in the face. I can say with a fairly highly degree of certainty that there are no other risks. And the other people will possible poor immune systems or otherwise will not be in attendance because of said poor immune systems and cannot travel.

I did. You said "He is currently living in an area where there is a measles outbreak (or maybe was in the last two weeks?"

Which is why I said: "Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?"

Your original post did not clarify how big of an area it was and whether or not the child was actually at risk due to actual exposure. Do you know that they in fact could've been exposed to it from the mom or parents? Or is it that you know there's been an outbreak in that particular area but do not know if the child has been anywhere around the area where the outbreak is?

I guess my question is - how did you hear about the outbreak? And what are the chances the child has been part of it or near where it is?

flutteringinfl · April 2015

LakeR2014 said:

mikenberger said:

LakeR2014 said:

ashley8918 said:

LakeR2014 said:
This question came up hypothetically during a conversation and the response from an antivaxer was: 'Well do you know the vaccine status of everyone at your wedding? Where everyone has been in the last month and whether or not they've been out of country and had the necessary quarantine periods? If not, then you're signalling out my kids and that's not fair.'

I was dumbfounded by her reasoning as her questions were reasons as to why her kids SHOULD have vaccines, but whatever.    She posed another good question though - you specifically know that her kid is unvaccinated but do you know that all of your other guests are vaccinated? Are you willing to ask?   If not, then you are singling out the one child and family.

If the mom of the twins takes her kids out of the house, to the store, to the doctors office, etc, she's risking them coming in contact with un-vaccinated people all the time.   We had some un-vaccinated kids at our wedding and everyone who had other children were aware of it, because the mom is vocal about it. As my brother, who had a 4 year old and 10 month old there stated 'I can protect my kids as much as possible by getting them vaccinated, but I refuse to isolate them because of other's stupidity.'     Let the parents of other children, specifically the twins know, and let them make the decision.   Because ultimately it's their children and their decision.

No, she is not "singling out" that child. He (she?) poses a KNOWN risk to those babies (and to fucking everyone). The argument that a known risk should be ignored because there MIGHT be unknown risks is stupid logic.

Let's say that Johnny has decided that he is going to kill the president. The Whatevergovernmentagency has become aware of this. Should they not eliminate this risk (by stopping him/arresting him/whatever) just because there are maybe, and very probably, other people dead set on icing the president?

It's a complete logical fallacy.
Your argument is way off base. Seriously? You're equating a known, definite threat to the possibility of a threat?   I understand your argument, but the above example is taking it to a high extreme.

As to known - it's not a known risk. She poses a possible risk. Does the OP know that the unvaccinated child was in the area where exposure happened? Or is she going off of a news report she read from the area? Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?

My point above was that the child is unvaccinated, yes, and may have a possible risk. But unless the OP knows the medical history and whereabouts of all of their guests they cannot fully protect the twins, she can just inform and allow the parents of the twins to make their own decision.

For the record, I'm all for vaccines and think those opposed to them are on their own personal high-horse, belong in a loony bin, or are out to get attention.

If you had read my OP I clearly stated:

The child lives in an area where there is a measles outbreak but is not exhibiting or has come into contact with it to my knowledge. (And the outbreak is not of the same caliber as the recent Disneyland outbreak)

The mother of the twins will be discussing with her husband how best to proceed. She thanked me for the heads up and appreciated my looking out for her boys. Now I feel like punching the cousin in the face. I can say with a fairly highly degree of certainty that there are no other risks. And the other people will possible poor immune systems or otherwise will not be in attendance because of said poor immune systems and cannot travel.

I did. You said "He is currently living in an area where there is a measles outbreak (or maybe was in the last two weeks?"

Which is why I said: "Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?"

Your original post did not clarify how big of an area it was and whether or not the child was actually at risk due to actual exposure. Do you know that they in fact could've been exposed to it from the mom or parents? Or is it that you know there's been an outbreak in that particular area but do not know if the child has been anywhere around the area where the outbreak is?

I guess my question is - how did you hear about the outbreak? And what are the chances the child has been part of it or near where it is?

I just don't think picking apart the details is productive here. The mother won't vaccinate her child. He'll be in a situation where he's exposed to infants who cannot be vaccinated. Just because OP can't answer a few questions doesn't mean she should put her guests in unnecessary risk.

mikenberger · April 2015

LakeR2014 said:

mikenberger said:

LakeR2014 said:

ashley8918 said:

LakeR2014 said:
This question came up hypothetically during a conversation and the response from an antivaxer was: 'Well do you know the vaccine status of everyone at your wedding? Where everyone has been in the last month and whether or not they've been out of country and had the necessary quarantine periods? If not, then you're signalling out my kids and that's not fair.'

I was dumbfounded by her reasoning as her questions were reasons as to why her kids SHOULD have vaccines, but whatever.    She posed another good question though - you specifically know that her kid is unvaccinated but do you know that all of your other guests are vaccinated? Are you willing to ask?   If not, then you are singling out the one child and family.

If the mom of the twins takes her kids out of the house, to the store, to the doctors office, etc, she's risking them coming in contact with un-vaccinated people all the time.   We had some un-vaccinated kids at our wedding and everyone who had other children were aware of it, because the mom is vocal about it. As my brother, who had a 4 year old and 10 month old there stated 'I can protect my kids as much as possible by getting them vaccinated, but I refuse to isolate them because of other's stupidity.'     Let the parents of other children, specifically the twins know, and let them make the decision.   Because ultimately it's their children and their decision.

No, she is not "singling out" that child. He (she?) poses a KNOWN risk to those babies (and to fucking everyone). The argument that a known risk should be ignored because there MIGHT be unknown risks is stupid logic.

Let's say that Johnny has decided that he is going to kill the president. The Whatevergovernmentagency has become aware of this. Should they not eliminate this risk (by stopping him/arresting him/whatever) just because there are maybe, and very probably, other people dead set on icing the president?

It's a complete logical fallacy.
Your argument is way off base. Seriously? You're equating a known, definite threat to the possibility of a threat?   I understand your argument, but the above example is taking it to a high extreme.

As to known - it's not a known risk. She poses a possible risk. Does the OP know that the unvaccinated child was in the area where exposure happened? Or is she going off of a news report she read from the area? Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?

My point above was that the child is unvaccinated, yes, and may have a possible risk. But unless the OP knows the medical history and whereabouts of all of their guests they cannot fully protect the twins, she can just inform and allow the parents of the twins to make their own decision.

For the record, I'm all for vaccines and think those opposed to them are on their own personal high-horse, belong in a loony bin, or are out to get attention.

If you had read my OP I clearly stated:

The child lives in an area where there is a measles outbreak but is not exhibiting or has come into contact with it to my knowledge. (And the outbreak is not of the same caliber as the recent Disneyland outbreak)

The mother of the twins will be discussing with her husband how best to proceed. She thanked me for the heads up and appreciated my looking out for her boys. Now I feel like punching the cousin in the face. I can say with a fairly highly degree of certainty that there are no other risks. And the other people will possible poor immune systems or otherwise will not be in attendance because of said poor immune systems and cannot travel.

I did. You said "He is currently living in an area where there is a measles outbreak (or maybe was in the last two weeks?"

Which is why I said: "Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?"

Your original post did not clarify how big of an area it was and whether or not the child was actually at risk due to actual exposure. Do you know that they in fact could've been exposed to it from the mom or parents? Or is it that you know there's been an outbreak in that particular area but do not know if the child has been anywhere around the area where the outbreak is?

I guess my question is - how did you hear about the outbreak? And what are the chances the child has been part of it or near where it is?

I heard about the outbreak from my mother, who also lives in the same area. I confirmed it with the mother of said child and asked if she was fearful of her son getting measles. Her response was ridiculous... We'll just say she's not worried - but it's not because he wasn't possibly exposed. But that he doesn't need vaccines. Long story short. I didn't pursue the conversation further as she becomes VERY defensive when you ask about her son and her decision to not vaccinate.

TrixieJess · April 2015

LakeR2014 said:

LakeR2014 said:

ashley8918 said:

LakeR2014 said:
This question came up hypothetically during a conversation and the response from an antivaxer was: 'Well do you know the vaccine status of everyone at your wedding? Where everyone has been in the last month and whether or not they've been out of country and had the necessary quarantine periods? If not, then you're signalling out my kids and that's not fair.'

I was dumbfounded by her reasoning as her questions were reasons as to why her kids SHOULD have vaccines, but whatever.    She posed another good question though - you specifically know that her kid is unvaccinated but do you know that all of your other guests are vaccinated? Are you willing to ask?   If not, then you are singling out the one child and family.

If the mom of the twins takes her kids out of the house, to the store, to the doctors office, etc, she's risking them coming in contact with un-vaccinated people all the time.   We had some un-vaccinated kids at our wedding and everyone who had other children were aware of it, because the mom is vocal about it. As my brother, who had a 4 year old and 10 month old there stated 'I can protect my kids as much as possible by getting them vaccinated, but I refuse to isolate them because of other's stupidity.'     Let the parents of other children, specifically the twins know, and let them make the decision.   Because ultimately it's their children and their decision.

No, she is not "singling out" that child. He (she?) poses a KNOWN risk to those babies (and to fucking everyone). The argument that a known risk should be ignored because there MIGHT be unknown risks is stupid logic.

Let's say that Johnny has decided that he is going to kill the president. The Whatevergovernmentagency has become aware of this. Should they not eliminate this risk (by stopping him/arresting him/whatever) just because there are maybe, and very probably, other people dead set on icing the president?

It's a complete logical fallacy.
Your argument is way off base. Seriously? You're equating a known, definite threat to the possibility of a threat?   I understand your argument, but the above example is taking it to a high extreme.

As to known - it's not a known risk. She poses a possible risk. Does the OP know that the unvaccinated child was in the area where exposure happened? Or is she going off of a news report she read from the area? Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?

My point above was that the child is unvaccinated, yes, and may have a possible risk. But unless the OP knows the medical history and whereabouts of all of their guests they cannot fully protect the twins, she can just inform and allow the parents of the twins to make their own decision.

For the record, I'm all for vaccines and think those opposed to them are on their own personal high-horse, belong in a loony bin, or are out to get attention.

If you had read my OP I clearly stated:

The child lives in an area where there is a measles outbreak but is not exhibiting or has come into contact with it to my knowledge. (And the outbreak is not of the same caliber as the recent Disneyland outbreak)

The mother of the twins will be discussing with her husband how best to proceed. She thanked me for the heads up and appreciated my looking out for her boys. Now I feel like punching the cousin in the face. I can say with a fairly highly degree of certainty that there are no other risks. And the other people will possible poor immune systems or otherwise will not be in attendance because of said poor immune systems and cannot travel.

I did. You said "He is currently living in an area where there is a measles outbreak (or maybe was in the last two weeks?"

Which is why I said: "Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?"

Your original post did not clarify how big of an area it was and whether or not the child was actually at risk due to actual exposure. Do you know that they in fact could've been exposed to it from the mom or parents? Or is it that you know there's been an outbreak in that particular area but do not know if the child has been anywhere around the area where the outbreak is?

I guess my question is - how did you hear about the outbreak? And what are the chances the child has been part of it or near where it is?

I don't know how it is in your area, but where I am, if there is any sort of outbreak (even one person) Public Health will issue a public warning to all radio and tv stations as well as notices to daycares, libraries, and schools.

ashley8918 · April 2015

flutteringinfl said:

LakeR2014 said:

mikenberger said:

LakeR2014 said:

ashley8918 said:

LakeR2014 said:
This question came up hypothetically during a conversation and the response from an antivaxer was: 'Well do you know the vaccine status of everyone at your wedding? Where everyone has been in the last month and whether or not they've been out of country and had the necessary quarantine periods? If not, then you're signalling out my kids and that's not fair.'

I was dumbfounded by her reasoning as her questions were reasons as to why her kids SHOULD have vaccines, but whatever.    She posed another good question though - you specifically know that her kid is unvaccinated but do you know that all of your other guests are vaccinated? Are you willing to ask?   If not, then you are singling out the one child and family.

If the mom of the twins takes her kids out of the house, to the store, to the doctors office, etc, she's risking them coming in contact with un-vaccinated people all the time.   We had some un-vaccinated kids at our wedding and everyone who had other children were aware of it, because the mom is vocal about it. As my brother, who had a 4 year old and 10 month old there stated 'I can protect my kids as much as possible by getting them vaccinated, but I refuse to isolate them because of other's stupidity.'     Let the parents of other children, specifically the twins know, and let them make the decision.   Because ultimately it's their children and their decision.

No, she is not "singling out" that child. He (she?) poses a KNOWN risk to those babies (and to fucking everyone). The argument that a known risk should be ignored because there MIGHT be unknown risks is stupid logic.

Let's say that Johnny has decided that he is going to kill the president. The Whatevergovernmentagency has become aware of this. Should they not eliminate this risk (by stopping him/arresting him/whatever) just because there are maybe, and very probably, other people dead set on icing the president?

It's a complete logical fallacy.
Your argument is way off base. Seriously? You're equating a known, definite threat to the possibility of a threat?   I understand your argument, but the above example is taking it to a high extreme.

As to known - it's not a known risk. She poses a possible risk. Does the OP know that the unvaccinated child was in the area where exposure happened? Or is she going off of a news report she read from the area? Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?

My point above was that the child is unvaccinated, yes, and may have a possible risk. But unless the OP knows the medical history and whereabouts of all of their guests they cannot fully protect the twins, she can just inform and allow the parents of the twins to make their own decision.

For the record, I'm all for vaccines and think those opposed to them are on their own personal high-horse, belong in a loony bin, or are out to get attention.

If you had read my OP I clearly stated:

The child lives in an area where there is a measles outbreak but is not exhibiting or has come into contact with it to my knowledge. (And the outbreak is not of the same caliber as the recent Disneyland outbreak)

The mother of the twins will be discussing with her husband how best to proceed. She thanked me for the heads up and appreciated my looking out for her boys. Now I feel like punching the cousin in the face. I can say with a fairly highly degree of certainty that there are no other risks. And the other people will possible poor immune systems or otherwise will not be in attendance because of said poor immune systems and cannot travel.

I did. You said "He is currently living in an area where there is a measles outbreak (or maybe was in the last two weeks?"

Which is why I said: "Is the possible risk area the size of a city block or the state of California? How close was the child to the exposed area?"

Your original post did not clarify how big of an area it was and whether or not the child was actually at risk due to actual exposure. Do you know that they in fact could've been exposed to it from the mom or parents? Or is it that you know there's been an outbreak in that particular area but do not know if the child has been anywhere around the area where the outbreak is?

I guess my question is - how did you hear about the outbreak? And what are the chances the child has been part of it or near where it is?
I just don't think picking apart the details is productive here. The mother won't vaccinate her child. He'll be in a situation where he's exposed to infants who cannot be vaccinated. Just because OP can't answer a few questions doesn't mean she should put her guests in unnecessary risk.

Exactly. Frankly, the details don't fucking matter. The child is not vaccinated, and may or may not have been exposed. This is not a risk worth taking.

yogapants · April 2015

"How did you hear about the outbreak?"

Lolwut. It's not like she claimed that the boy is coming from an area with an outbreak of a zombie virus. Measles outbreaks have been all over the news this year. This isn't a conspiracy theory.

mikenberger · April 2015

My point was and continues to be:

I know that this little boy is not vaccinated. I know that I have two infants in attendance that are not old enough to be fully vaccinated (confirmed by mother). I do not want to willingly expose these babies to a possible risk. I wanted to know if I was off base, if I was being a crazy person, if I needed a bunch of beer... and what to do.

It sucks that this is the issue at hand but there's honestly nothing I can do about it but to tell the mother of the twins (which I have told her and she thanked me and is discussing the twins attendance with her husband) and, in future gatherings, be more aware of the situation. I still haven't decided what to do about the attendance of the little boy. Technically it's FI's cousin's child, so I think he should handle it, but it's just such a shitty situation all around.

southernbelle0915 · April 2015

Anti-vaxers make me absolutely RAGEY. It's so incredibly socially irresponsible. I think the reason it pisses me off so much is obviously because it's stupid and dangerous, but mostly because there's NOTHING that supports it besides "I'm entitled to my opinion" and "but Jenny McCarthy said...".

I do think it's crappy that this is just being dealt with 4 days before the wedding....even though this woman is objectively stupid, the kid was invited, you knew the kid wasn't vaccinated, she bought him a plane ticket, and is traveling from 20 hours away. This will probably end the relationship. You probably don't care (I wouldn't really either), but I would apologize for the inconvenience.

theartistformerlyknownas · April 2015

mikenberger said:
My point was and continues to be:

I know that this little boy is not vaccinated. I know that I have two infants in attendance that are not old enough to be fully vaccinated (confirmed by mother). I do not want to willingly expose these babies to a possible risk. I wanted to know if I was off base, if I was being a crazy person, if I needed a bunch of beer... and what to do.

It sucks that this is the issue at hand but there's honestly nothing I can do about it but to tell the mother of the twins (which I have told her and she thanked me and is discussing the twins attendance with her husband) and, in future gatherings, be more aware of the situation. I still haven't decided what to do about the attendance of the little boy. Technically it's FI's cousin's child, so I think he should handle it, but it's just such a shitty situation all around.

I think you handled it well so far. This mom sounds like such a crazy pants I HIGHLY doubt she would respect your request to mitigate the risk posed by her son. She probably takes him to chicken pox parties, and HOPES she brings measles to your wedding. Better to warn those at risk since she'll likely show up and let him cough all over the buffet just to spite you. I'm sure you don't want to bring on all the family drama that would ensue if you had your DOC prevent her from entering/kick her out.

hellosweetie1015 · April 2015

mikenberger said:
My point was and continues to be:

I know that this little boy is not vaccinated. I know that I have two infants in attendance that are not old enough to be fully vaccinated (confirmed by mother). I do not want to willingly expose these babies to a possible risk. I wanted to know if I was off base, if I was being a crazy person, if I needed a bunch of beer... and what to do.

It sucks that this is the issue at hand but there's honestly nothing I can do about it but to tell the mother of the twins (which I have told her and she thanked me and is discussing the twins attendance with her husband) and, in future gatherings, be more aware of the situation. I still haven't decided what to do about the attendance of the little boy. Technically it's FI's cousin's child, so I think he should handle it, but it's just such a shitty situation all around.

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.

mikenberger · April 2015

hellosweetie1015 said:

mikenberger said:
My point was and continues to be:

I know that this little boy is not vaccinated. I know that I have two infants in attendance that are not old enough to be fully vaccinated (confirmed by mother). I do not want to willingly expose these babies to a possible risk. I wanted to know if I was off base, if I was being a crazy person, if I needed a bunch of beer... and what to do.

It sucks that this is the issue at hand but there's honestly nothing I can do about it but to tell the mother of the twins (which I have told her and she thanked me and is discussing the twins attendance with her husband) and, in future gatherings, be more aware of the situation. I still haven't decided what to do about the attendance of the little boy. Technically it's FI's cousin's child, so I think he should handle it, but it's just such a shitty situation all around.
A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.

I know I've had 3 MMR boosters. But I'm fairly certain it's just because my doctors just liked stabbing me in the arm. Diiiiiiiiick.

And yes. I'm kicking myself in the ass for not thinking of this sooner. It honestly never even occurred to me. Because why would a mother be a total crazy person and not do their best to do everything to protect their child? Oh well. I'm doing the best I can with what I have. /shrug

3 hours left of work and then I'm out of here for the week. And there will be a glass of wine in my hand while I'm getting a pedicure.

theartistformerlyknownas · April 2015

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.

To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.

hellosweetie1015 · April 2015

lolo883 said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.
To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.

Oh yay!

...is it bad that I don't know when I was vaccinated? I know I WAS, because I know all my siblings were, but I don't know when. I also know I was exposed to chicken pox before I could get the vaccine, and got like six little poxes.

mikenberger · April 2015

hellosweetie1015 said:

lolo883 said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.
To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.
Oh yay!

...is it bad that I don't know when I was vaccinated? I know I WAS, because I know all my siblings were, but I don't know when. I also know I was exposed to chicken pox before I could get the vaccine, and got like six little poxes.

I got chicken pox when I was a kid AND when I had a full leg cast on from my ankle to hip. You want to know insanity? Be a 6yr old with a cast and chicken pox.

swiftsticks · April 2015

mikenberger, I think you're being a great host and have done everything in your power to keep people informed of the situation. You're not crazy, you're being responsible.

I'm an adult with no children who was invited a birthday of a 1 year old. On the invitation, right below the RSVP info, was a little picture of a needle next to the words "No poke, no play". I guess this is the new reality.

southernbelle0915 · April 2015

mikenberger said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

lolo883 said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.
To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.
Oh yay!

...is it bad that I don't know when I was vaccinated? I know I WAS, because I know all my siblings were, but I don't know when. I also know I was exposed to chicken pox before I could get the vaccine, and got like six little poxes.
I got chicken pox when I was a kid AND when I had a full leg cast on from my ankle to hip. You want to know insanity? Be a 6yr old with a cast and chicken pox.

I never had chicken pox as a kid. My doctor ended up realizing this when I was like 19 and I got the vaccine pronto.

hellosweetie1015 · April 2015

@mikenberger OH DEAR GOODNESS. That would drive me nuts at 26. My six little poxes drove me up the wall. I can't even handle a mosquito bite.

I've never broken anything that I know of. I still kind of think I missed out on a rite of passage growing up because of it.

mikenberger · April 2015

hellosweetie1015 said:
@mikenberger OH DEAR GOODNESS. That would drive me nuts at 26. My six little poxes drove me up the wall. I can't even handle a mosquito bite.

I've never broken anything that I know of. I still kind of think I missed out on a rite of passage growing up because of it.

Oh, this needs to be a thread, I feel haha

I've broken:

My right leg (tibia and fibula- lower leg bones) - 6 years

My right kneecap - 18 years

3 toes on my left foot - 8 years

Fairly certain I broke a finger too, but they just tape that business up, so that's what I did.

TrixieJess · April 2015

lolo883 said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.
To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.

Some people don't actually get immunity from the vaccines *hello from over here*. I was fully vaccinated (my mother was a nurse, and my brother was immunocompromised) and I got measles and mumps as a child. I'm immune now, but the vaccines didn't cover me completely. That being said, I will vaccinate my child with everything that our Government pays for.

[Deleted User] · April 2015

banana468 · April 2015

TrixieJess said:

lolo883 said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.
To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.
Some people don't actually get immunity from the vaccines *hello from over here*. I was fully vaccinated (my mother was a nurse, and my brother was immunocompromised) and I got measles and mumps as a child. I'm immune now, but the vaccines didn't cover me completely. That being said, I will vaccinate my child with everything that our Government pays for.

That's why you're supposed to vaccinate everyone! It doesn't always take (look at the flu vaccine) but herd immunity designed so that those vaccinated who can get the virus don't because the rest of the herd IS vaccinated.

Not every vaccine is as effective as the polio vaccine. And it's an unfortunate argument that people use as a reason NOT to vaccinate when in reality, it's a reason TO vaccinate.

lyndausvi · April 2015

I was vaccinated as a kid for Whooping Cough. I still got Whooping Cough as an adult. It fucking sucked. I wouldn't wish at on my worst enemy. It makes me so mad when people do not vaccinate their kids for whooping cough. It was scary as shit as an adult. Can't even imagine as a young child.

levioosa · April 2015

swiftsticks said:
mikenberger, I think you're being a great host and have done everything in your power to keep people informed of the situation. You're not crazy, you're being responsible.

I'm an adult with no children who was invited a birthday of a 1 year old. On the invitation, right below the RSVP info, was a little picture of a needle next to the words "No poke, no play". I guess this is the new reality.

I think I've mentioned before that at one of my early birthday parties, a mom brought her kid with chicken pox and nearly the whole party came down with it (this was pre-varicella vaccination). One of the dads ended up in the hospital for over a week and almost died because of it. Later, when I was home schooled, I heard of "pox parties" and as someone who had suffered from chicken pox, I thought it was the stupidest thing ever. Why voluntarily expose yourself? Getting chicken pox sucked so much. **Oh, and not every homeschooler was anti-vax; sadly though, it seems to be a spot where a lot of them hang out, and gives the rest of us a bad name.

KatWAG · April 2015

@mikenberger did you say anything to the mother of the unvaccinated kid? Suggest a babysitting agency for her kid during the wedding?

mikenberger · April 2015

KatWAG said:
@mikenberger did you say anything to the mother of the unvaccinated kid? Suggest a babysitting agency for her kid during the wedding?

I have not. And honestly don't know what to say. Because I KNOW it will be a battle. She is firm and gets near combative (verbally) when someone speaks otherwise about her choice to not vaccinate. It's almost like she's nearly looking for a fight. She'll post things on Instagram/Facebook and then someone will comment "You should really reconsider..." And off she goes. "You don't get to tell me how to parent! I did my research. Have you done yours?! I didn't think so! Because if you did, you'd know that vaccine injury is REAL and these vaccines that are being pushed on parents and children are ridiculous and harming our children!!!"

I'm not sure if that's a fight I'm willing to have right now, under the circumstances of 3 days away from the wedding, they flew in from out of state (a drive of over 18 hours away) and I know the mother is extremely excited to attend. This is FI's family, so I believe that he should handle it and he's unsure of how to proceed either. I just wish I would've thought of this sooner, but I guess at least I was able to warn the parents of two children that would be at risk. Could've saved a lot of headache for right now (had I thought of this sooner).

lyndausvi · April 2015

pinkrevenge said:
Yes, it would have been signaling her kid out, but she's the idiot who has made her kid become a risk, and screw her if she's mad about it.
If you bring a loaded gun to a gun-free zone and announce that you have a loaded gun, you don't get to make demands that it's unfair that no one else is being frisked. You're the numbnuts who proudly proclaimed to bringing a weapon.

the problem with this is you know it's a gun-free zone. The Mikenburger's invite did not stipulate there was condition that her child needs to be vax before attending. In good faith she accepted the invite, bought plane tickets, got hotel, took time off work (if she works) and now 3 days out she is being told that indeed it was a conditional invite.

That kind of sucks to be honest.

Not saying I do not understand mikenburger's choice, but I would be FUCKING PISSED to be told 3 days out of an OOT wedding that the invite was conditional. Regardless of what the condition is.

Actions have consequences. Non-vax parents need to understand their kids might be excluded. But 3 days out of an OOT event without prior notice it was a possibility. Sorry, that sucks.

Anyway the first time I broke something was the DAY I RETURN TO SCHOOL FROM CHICKEN POX. Yep, the very day I returned to school I ended up breaking my collar-bone. Left one and I was a lefty. Oh and make things even more fun for my parents, my mom was in the hospital having a hysterectomy. I was young, but I did think it was cool I was the only one who got to see mom in the hospital. This was before cell phones and stuff. I showed up all wrapped up and mom was like "WTF?"

Blergbot · April 2015

Sorry if I spread any misinformation. Don't trust everything you read, people. Also, it did occur to me later, being the mom of a preemie, that the twins were probably preemies, as twins often are, and therefore may not even have the benefit of passive immunity. When I thought about whether or not I would bring my child to OP's wedding, the answer was no.

My brother also got measles in the 89 outbreak. Back when he was born kids were vaccinated too early and it was less effective, so when he came in contact with an unvaccinated kid, he got it. The measles itself wasn't the scary part. He came down with encephalitis as a result and had to be hospitalized. It was very serious.

So yeah, I would tell that mom to get her son a babysitter.

madamerwin · April 2015

hellosweetie1015 said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.
To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.

Oh yay!

...is it bad that I don't know when I was vaccinated? I know I WAS, because I know all my siblings were, but I don't know when. I also know I was exposed to chicken pox before I could get the vaccine, and got like six little poxes.

-------BOXESBOXESBOXES------

I just got blood work back (pre-pregnancy screening), and it turns out that I am NOT immune to chicken pox, even though I had them when I was young! I had a super light case, and my immunity (if I ever had it) is worn off. I got my first chicken pox vaccine a few weeks ago, I have to get another shot next month. I am, however, still immune to measles (and mumps and rubella).

I definitely suggest you get your immunity checked - chicken pox as an adult (especially if you're pregnant or around small children) is supposed to be super dangerous.

On another note - we have anti-vaxxer friends. I accidentally got into a conversation with them about it a couple years back, and boy, was that a mistake. SO MUCH MISINFORMATION! They and their children are coming to our wedding. I had not even considered the fact that the kids aren't vaccinated. Luckily, there won't be any un-vaccinated babies at the wedding (I know this for a fact), but I guess there is no easy way to know if there are immuno-suppressed people coming. No measles outbreaks in our area recently, so I guess that's good? Ugh. I wish people would just vaccinate their damn kids.

hellosweetie1015 · April 2015

tfmrserwin said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

hellosweetie1015 said:

A. You always need a bunch of beer.

B. It's not really a thing I think you need to be super-aware of. It's ridiculous that you have to be aware of it at all, but frankly you and/or FI need to make it known that until little Jimmy's mama gets on the vaxxer path (and God forbid it takes something like this to make it happen, but it's entirely possible that it could), poor little Jimmy isn't going to be invited to things at which he could become Patient Zero. Which... is all things. You KNOW when a lot of kids aren't vaccinated - either they're babies who are too young to be vaccinated, or Mom is the Anti-Vax Newsfeed Plague Queen. It's harder to know if adults aren't - and, like, don't vaccines "wear out" and need boosters as people age? I feel like I read that in a couple of our pregnancy threads. So couldn't someone be less resistant to something and not even really know? It's frankly an unmitigated risk for a larger number of people than just two babies.

It sucks that it didn't pop into your head until now. But you're doing all the right things, I think, or at least the rightest things you can do in the situation.
To the bolded - it's believed that they CAN wear off, but it hasn't really been proven WHEN that happens yet. But FWIW, I got the MMR vaccine at age 2 and got chicken pox (disease, not vaccine) at age 8 and as of my pre-pregnancy screenings in December at age 31, am still fully immune to all 4.
Oh yay!

...is it bad that I don't know when I was vaccinated? I know I WAS, because I know all my siblings were, but I don't know when. I also know I was exposed to chicken pox before I could get the vaccine, and got like six little poxes.

-------BOXESBOXESBOXES------

I just got blood work back (pre-pregnancy screening), and it turns out that I am NOT immune to chicken pox, even though I had them when I was young! I had a super light case, and my immunity (if I ever had it) is worn off. I got my first chicken pox vaccine a few weeks ago, I have to get another shot next month. I am, however, still immune to measles (and mumps and rubella).

I definitely suggest you get your immunity checked - chicken pox as an adult (especially if you're pregnant or around small children) is supposed to be super dangerous.

On another note - we have anti-vaxxer friends. I accidentally got into a conversation with them about it a couple years back, and boy, was that a mistake. SO MUCH MISINFORMATION! They and their children are coming to our wedding. I had not even considered the fact that the kids aren't vaccinated. Luckily, there won't be any un-vaccinated babies at the wedding (I know this for a fact), but I guess there is no easy way to know if there are immuno-suppressed people coming. No measles outbreaks in our area recently, so I guess that's good? Ugh. I wish people would just vaccinate their damn kids.

ETA A POX ON THE BOXES!

Ohh.... yeah I guess I should look into that. I spent 5 years in childcare, and I want to get back into it when I leave this job after Bossman retires (or if FI gets a better job far away enough to justify quitting). Plus we'll probably be TTC in a couple years at the latest. Hmm.

So. Keep my mouth shut? Be discrete? Or turtles?

Re: So. Keep my mouth shut? Be discrete? Or turtles?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards