Photo credit via Flickr cc license.
This is not a post about the relative merits of vaccinating versus not vaccinating your children. That question is not up for debate.
Throughout history, populations have been decimated by new viruses introduced by explorers and settlers from abroad. Entire tribes of Native people were wiped out after European contact with the Americas. And even where exposure to a disease had already been established, epidemic viral outbreaks continued to wreak havoc on large numbers of people throughout the world.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could somehow protect ourselves? Somehow build up immunity against those viruses without actually contracting them? If only there were some sort of shot that could magically protect us from the ravages of disease.
It turns out that we didn’t need magic because we have science. Vaccines have worked to prevent the spread of disease wherever they have been widely adopted. They have worked so well, in fact, that many of the diseases we are immunized against haven’t been seen for generations.
As medical science continued to develop more and better vaccines, parents happily vaccinated their children against more and more illnesses. Until now.
* * *
Suddenly, within the past 10 or 15 years, vaccination rates steadily began to drop.
Don’t get me wrong; there have always been outliers. There are religious communities like the Amish and Christian Science that largely don’t believe in vaccines or modern medicine. There are other fringe communities and individuals who are distrustful of the establishment in general and opt out of standard medical treatment like vaccines for various reasons.
But that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about a significant number of mainstream parents, many of whom are well-educated, who decided to either forego or significantly delay vaccinating their children. (These parents may be into “alternative” health practices and lifestyles, but they live in urban centres, hold down jobs and send their kids to public schools. They are alternative like Nirvana was alternative.)
I want to know why.
The prevailing theory is that a widely publicized (and since discredited) study that was published by the prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, linked the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps and rubella) to autism and caused widespread fear and distrust of that vaccine and vaccines in general. This is also the Jenny McCarthy theory of vaccine denial since she was an early advocate of the so-called link between vaccines and autism.
But I’m not so sure. Certainly, the suggestion that vaccines could trigger autism in some people gave many parents pause. And I can absolutely understand how a parent who has a child who suddenly begins to show symptoms of autism after receiving a vaccination could want to believe that theory. Still, I’ve known enough people who haven’t vaccinated their children to wonder if that wasn’t an oversimplification.
The autism theory, in other words, is one part of the story, but I think there’s more to it than that.
I think the rising popularity of natural childbirth throughout the ’90s and 2000s fostered distrust of the medical establishment and, at the same time, sowed the idea that we should be the ones making medical choices for ourselves and our children — and all those choices should be equally respected. The internet further facilitated the democratization of medicine as every lay man and woman decided they could interpret the science for themselves, thankyouverymuch. And, finally, I think the medical establishment itself was extremely slow to respond to these sea changes in a meaningful way.
* * *
First, I wanted to talk to actual parents to see if my theories hold water. I interviewed four parents for this post: two who are steadfastly opposed to vaccinating their children and two who abstained from vaccinating for several years and then changed their minds. I also asked a few stray questions of several other parents. This would not be nearly enough for a sociology thesis, or even a Toronto Life feature story, but I think it’ll do for this epic blog post.
None of the people I talked to want to be identified. Names and identifying characteristics have been changed. If you think you know who I’m talking about, you’re wrong. Let’s put down the pitchforks for just a second and listen.
May is freelance graphic designer who lives in Vancouver with her husband and school-aged daughter. She also has a 20-year-old daughter from a previous relationship. Her younger daughter has been vaccinated according to the standard timeline while her eldest was not.
“To be honest, I’d never heard of the idea of not vaccinating before I was pregnant with my daughter in 1995,” May said. Then again, who had at that time? But it made sense that the sort of perma-hippie Vancouver Island community she lived in when she gave birth would be ahead of the alt-medicine curve.
May had moved to Vancouver Island from Calgary and had already become a vegetarian and was into feminist health issues. She was already worrying about toxins from plastics leaking into our food well before anyone had heard of BPA. She had a midwife and was planning a natural childbirth.
“I had a natural proclivity to alternative takes on things, which has ultimately served me well because I can use critical thinking when it comes to current events.” May said, “I had a natural skepticism, but not an affinity for conspiracy theories.”
“The first couple we met when we moved to the Island was this younger Boomer couple and they were really nice and they were toxicologists,” May told me. “I was concerned that I had smoked pot early in my pregnancy. So I talked to them about it and they looked up all these toxicology reports for me. And they were the ones who brought up the idea of not vaccinating. They said there’d been new studies and that it was up in the air. We either overstimulate babies’ immune systems or we vaccinate them too early.”
Around the same time, May began reading Mothering magazine, a prominent “natural mothering” publication that was in print from 1976 to 2010 and that continues as a website. There was a book you could order from Mothering that May recognized in a second-hand bookstore. “I can’t remember the name of it, but it had a blue cover and was essentially a pamphlet. It was a series of articles about the dangers of vaccinating.”
That tipped the scales for May and she decided to at least wait. “We would delay vaxes and not do all of them.”
Ultimately, May’s first born wound up getting some vaccinations here and there in order to travel and to appease her husband who wasn’t as keen about the idea of skipping shots. But she didn’t get all of her needles and she certainly didn’t get them on time.
“I’ve been thinking about this for the past couple years. I don’t even know which vaccines she wound up getting. She’s a grown woman now. She could get pregnant and not be vaccinated against rubella. What!?”
By the time May’s daughter started school, there were already enough people in that community who were asking for an exemption to the mandatory vaccination rule that they had a form ready to go.
But eventually May changed her mind. The autism link was debunked (though the Lancet study was not published until 1998, three years after May had already decided to skip certain vaccines). The reason you could opt out, May says is because “most people vaccinate, so your risk is low. So it was always from the perspective of your family, your children. And that disturbed me. I was raised to believe you are responsible to your community and not just yourself. It always felt strange to me to rely on herd immunity.”
When May left her insular Island community, she also became more globally aware. “People are clamouring for these vaccines. People are dying. And I have the freedom to choose not to have them. Why would I not have them?”
“You know,” she added, “when I got rid of that pamphlet from Mothering, I didn’t give it away. I shredded it.”
* * *
Amy is a small business owner who lives in Montreal with her husband and three kids. None of their children have been vaccinated and they do attend a local public school.
“The choice to not vaccinate is part of a greater mistrust in modern hospital systems, big pharma and money in the the healthcare system,” Amy said. “Also a strong belief in preventative medicines or as some call it Eastern Medicine.” Amy also had natural childbirths under the care of a midwife for all her children.
She stresses that vaccines come from billion-dollar corporations and also notes her family doesn’t really use “natural” medicines either. “I know this might sound whack but I really do believe in the power of the mind and in meditation and self healing,” Amy said. “We are what we think. Our family never thinks about anything besides being healthy and strong and happy and so it is. We also practice yoga, eat well, live an active and healthy lifestyle generally.”
But Amy is quick to point out that she’s not anti-Western medicine. Rather, she feels strongly that every family should do what is right for them. “And, yes, it’s a luxury to be able to make those types of choices in a democratic and mostly immunized population. I can admit that if we lived in a country that was riddled with these diseases we would not be questioning the immunization process,” Amy said. “I just think it’s gone too far.”
Amy says nothing in particular prompted them to forego vaccinations. A fear of autism certainly didn’t play into it. They simply don’t trust what’s in them and prefer to rely on a belief in building immunity naturally. There is also a distaste for big pharma.
I asked Amy if she would ever vaccinate her kids in the future. “Yes, if we traveled to third world countries. We are in talks about doing it now that they’re a little older and their systems are strong. However, they have never been sick so this would likely make them sick for a while as their systems are pretty clean. We are happy with the choice we made but are also not completely closed to the idea of vaccines. It’s more a delayed response, I suppose.”
Amy is staunchly unafraid of the measles for now. “There is so much fear in the media, fear in parenting, fear fear fear. We try not to listen to the noise. No, I’m not scared. I don’t think about it. I don’t believe in being scared; I believe in focusing on health, not on sickness.”
But, ultimately, she’s not entirely opposed to changing her mind. “If I started to feel like kids were dropping like flies from measles I might reconsider it, yes. Again, we are talking it over now and discussing the possibilities, and we’re not completely closed off to the idea of vaccines. What we are is critical thinkers without a herd mentality.”
* * *
Jason is a working musicians who lives in Hamilton with his wife and two young children. Neither child is vaccinated.
Again, Jason points to his wife’s pregnancy and the birth of their first child as a departure point for them. Rather than vaccinating their kids, Jason said, “Our belief is that a healthy immune system is the best protection against infectious disease as well as formidable remedy.”
“We both felt more attuned to the idea of home birth and midwifery; less medicalization and more focus on emotional and spiritual wellness. Our decisions, both then and now have always been based on logic, intuition and science (or lack thereof).”
Jason, like other vaccine skeptics I’ve talked to, has clearly done plenty of research and is quickly able to rhyme off sophisticated-sounding reasons for opting out of immunizations. Among those listed are a lack of “comprehensive third party studies” of individual vaccines and their schedules, anecdotal evidence, doubt regarding the effectiveness of vaccines and an inherent distrust of pharmaceutical corporations and the government.
While Jason and his wife might consider vaccinating their children in the future, “If and when, vaccines are offered individually and/or at such a time when studies that take into account the entirety of the current vaccine schedule are made available,” they are not swayed by the current resurgence of measles. Jason claims that both vaccine safety and the risks of contracting the disease are unreliable. “There are no scientific weights on this scale – only anecdotal vs. unreliable.”
To his credit, Jason did not flinch when I asked what evidence he would have to see to change his position regarding vaccinations. He said he wants, “conclusive evidence that factors such as sanitation, nutrition and health care were not significant contributors to disease eradication when compared with vaccinations. And a comprehensive third party study of vaccine safety and efficacy.”
Jason stresses that opting out of vaccinations and interventions means going, “against the grain, which requires a great deal of patience, research, passion, an open mind and a broader view of health and wellness.”
Why does he forego vaccines? Jason would rather ask why others won’t think more critically. “Why do they continue taking their cues from institutions that are frequently shown to be unreliable, irresponsible and profit-driven? Why do they have such irrational contempt for informed people that have opposing views?” he asks. “And why can’t they be more willing to embrace them as fellow human beings?”
* * *
My final interview was with Laura, an academic living in Toronto with her husband and three sons. They opted out vaccinating their first born for a full four years before doing a complete about-face. Now, all three children are completely caught up on their shots.
As with everyone else (in my my extremely small sample), Laura places her decision to not vaccinate her first born within the context of midwifery and a natural birth plan. But in 2006 their planned homebirth ended up in a c-section and they were left feeling wounded.
“So our earliest days as parents were tinged with this mistrust of the mainstream medical scheme,” Laura said. “And we were pretty vulnerable to anti-medical rhetoric, right at the time when you’re vulnerable to everything.”
In fact, for Laura, it was the midwife herself who first suggested they didn’t have to vaccinate. “It was the first I’d ever heard of that!”
And, like May 10 years before her, Laura discovered the anti-vaccination rhetoric rampant in Mothering magazine. “It was pretty influential. It appealed to smarter, more educated, middle class women — and I’d say it did a lot of damage, actually.”
Despite knowing that vaccines actually do work, Laura clung to her new-found love of informed consent, the cornerstone of midwifery care. “I felt like I had to research vaccines very, very carefully before making a decision,” she said. “The main thrust of my concern was that “big pharma” had a stake in promoting vaccines and that I should examine that. Looking back, I’m embarrassed that I ever bothered with such a red herring, but I was in a frantically skeptical mode.”
After four years of abstaining and researching, the evidence in favour of vaccinating couldn’t be ignored any longer. Laura vaccinated her first-born son.
Looking back, Laura acknowledges that the main argument against vaccinating was that her baby would have a greater likelihood of experiencing some sort of (likely mild to moderate) reaction to a shot than to being exposed to most of the diseases we vaccinate against. “That’s right,” she said, “and that’s exactly the narcissistic myopia that I’m embarrassed to have participated in.”
But for parents weighing the pros and cons of vaccinations around that time, the idea of anyone being exposed to those diseases was hard to wrap your head around. “I did realize that this was a “first world” decision, but I wasn’t framing it that way,” Laura said. “It felt like polio and diphtheria were so remote — so much more than just one herd’s immunity away — that everything was just hypothetical anyway.”
Laura credits a nurse from Kenya who gushed about how grateful she was her son could be vaccinated for free in Canada for helping to open her eyes. Well, it was that and Facebook, she said. “Back in 2006, there was Mothering magazine, and there was an attachment-parenting Yahoo group that I was part of. The conversation was insular, restricted to those self-censoring authorities. But as Facebook burgeoned, I was seeing more and more evidence-based information, and I was open to reading it. Useful infographics, heartfelt op-eds, all sorts of pro-vax material was being broadcast to me. I read it, I changed my mind.”
One more thing, I asked. Was autism a factor for you at all?
“Nope.”
* * *
That is not to say that autism wasn’t a factor for many people, or that it wasn’t one of many factors for even more people. But over and over again, I hear people waive off anti-vaccination arguments by saying, “It’s just one defunct study!” Not one of the people I talked to here or privately cited concerns about autism as a reason for not vaccinating their children. But they all, without exception, were committed to the principles of natural childbirth.
No, the trend to not vaccinate was not brought about by just one study, I’m convinced. It was packaged together with a rejection of the over-medicalization of birth and tied up in an idealized all-natural concept of childbirth and motherhood.
The internet just feeds all of those ideas. That’s what it does best. If you’re looking for psuedo-studies to cast doubt on even the most widely accepted and commonplace belief, you will find some online. (Although, as Laura pointed out, Facebook can actually pull us back into the light by exposing us to a cross-section of ideas recommended by people we actually know. There’s hope yet.)
And I am not trying to slag midwifery or natural childbirth. All three of my babies were delivered by midwives and I had nothing but wonderful experiences. But I sometimes wish midwives didn’t present everything as a completely unweighted choice.
I like being informed. I like giving consent. But I also like to hear what the medical professional recommends. If the only reason for abstaining from my blood sugar test is the unpleasantness of having blood drawn, then I’d probably be better off making sure I don’t have gestational diabetes, right? So why don’t they just say that?
I had a baby in 2006 and I cant tell you that it would have been SO EASY to opt out of vaccinating. Everybody around me was talking about it like it was yet another choice we had to make. On the one hand, public safety … but on the other, wouldn’t it be nicer if kittens could lick the immunity on instead?
Even my family doctor confused us with other patients and said, “So you don’t want to vaccinate, right?” “No! We do! Please vaccinate my baby!”
The only thing that kept me from not vaccinating, really, is the incredible breadth of my skepticism. I am even skeptical of the skeptics.
But while all of this was unfolding slowly over the years, the mainstream medical establishment did very little to stop it that I can see. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I am only just seeing public health campaigns educating the public about vaccinations now. We’ve been talking about the dangerously low vaccination rates for at least five years and probably longer.
Doctors that dismiss concerns out of hand because they either don’t have time or don’t care to explain don’t help confused new parents. The crazy, vast mess of misinformation on the internet doesn’t help. Screaming matches between friends in different camps doesn’t help.
But free information seminars might. In-depth government-run websites could. How about a free helpline where people can discuss their worries?
Trends don’t happen in a vacuum. There will always be anti-establishment people on the fringe who opt out of the mainstream. And I think that’s alright. We can support the fringe. We can deal with that.
But we can’t deal with an entire generation of new mothers thinking they need to decide for themselves whether or not to vaccinate their babies. We have enough to worry about, so why not let the doctors field that one?
25 replies on “Autism is only one small part of the anti-vaccination story. It’s time we looked past it.”
13 (blog) years is definitely a long time to be working on a post, but worth it. Great, empathetic look at a contentious issue.
The only thing that got my cockles (yes, cockles) up was the suggestion that urban hippies are too busy reading Mothering mag and having tea with their midwives to worry about vaccinating. I read (past-tense) Mothering, had a home birth, only drink organic milk and grow our own organic veggies. My kids have never needed antibiotics and I think it’s in part to the natural ways I try to keep their immune system healthy. And we vaccinate.
Trying to raise children more naturally from birth and not vaccinating are not causational.
But again, great look, and thank you for presenting stories without feeling the need to crucify those telling them.
Thanks, Karen. And that’s a fair criticism. I don’t think using a midwife and trying to raise your kids in a less toxic environment causes anti-vaxxing beliefs. But it does seem like those who do opt out often have natural childbirth in common.
I was intrigued that so many people mentioned Mothering magazine as a contributing factor in their decision.
Like Karen, we’ve made a lot of choices that fall on the natural parenting side of things. I breastfed my kids for around 3 years each, we lean heavily towards organic foods, we avoid products containing known carcinogens, my son has only had antibiotics once and my daughter never has, we’re a “wait and see” family rather than a “rush to the doctor” family. We feel like those choices are better for our health and the environment. But we also vaccinate, fully, on schedule and then some (e.g. travel vaccines).
I would 100% and unequivocally recommend midwifery care for anybody with a low-risk pregnancy. I also try to limit toxins, etc from kids environment. But there does seem to have been an influence rooted in the natural parenting movement that contributed to the decreasing vaccination rates. This doesn’t mean that it’s a direct causal relationship or that most people who use midwives don’t vaccinate.
I think you’re right on this, though I would also add that one ingredient is having the luxury of not having lived in a time when these diseases were rampant and killing children, so we do see it as something distant and theoretical not a real-world problem, as Laura noted. I’ll admit that part of my very pro-vax stance is because my own dad suffered horribly from polio as a child and still bears some of those scars now, and I know someone else of his generation with major health complications from the same disease, so I adamantly want no part of having my children run that risk.
I also feel like Amy and Jason talking about thinking healthy = staying healthy are basically equating luck with causation, which has its dangers, just as equating coincidence of autism with vaccines is falsely seeing causation and has its own set of dangers. I *really* hope their luck holds.
Ultimately, I have my own doubts about some of the vaccines and big pharma and some I think have been pushed through too fast without adequate testing, such as the HPV vaccine that was being pushed on young girls recently having not been as thoroughly studied as most. I want more info on that before my kid gets it, and by now, I think it’s had time to be studied to an adequate extent. But most others that our kids get have had decades of safety and testing behind them, so I truly don’t understand why you wouldn’t use that protection from some pretty horrible stuff.
Thanks for this quite measured post, though, it’s a refreshing change from the outright hysteria I see some places!
I really hope their luck holds, too. Thanks for the comment.
Well done. My eldest daughter was born during the SARS epidemic. That was an experience like no other. We were planning a hospital birth, and hospitals were under strict lock down…because of a contagious disease that we had no treatment for and no vaccine for. Our health care professionals were put at risk. As a new parent we were scared. No visitors allowed, no prenatal classes at the hospital, no postnatal breastfeeding clinic at the hospital. We saw first hand what it is like to give birth to a child in a community dealing with a deadly disease, an untreatable disease. That is what we are up against when we don’t vaccinate. Our second daughter was born at home, with a midwife. We eat organic food, I advocate for outdoor play for children, eco-living for families. We all need to be responsible members of society. Thank you for presenting this open discussion. It isn’t about demonizing people, it’s about attempting to understand one another and open the lines of communication and education…being responsible members of society.
Oh, wow. I nearly forgot how scary SARS was. What a time to have a baby.
Most people I know who do not vaccinate their children made that choice because of a serious reaction someone in their family (often their first born child) had to a vaccine. Some of them tried several vaccines before realizing that it was the vaccine that was causing the reaction. Sometimes the reaction is serious enough that they fear giving that child or any other child in their family another vaccine. With other medications (or with foods), we would call this an “allergy” and suggest that the family avoid the thing that triggers the dangerous reaction. But with vaccines, the medical community and others in the community continue to suggest that those people should get vaccinated.
Thanks for this excellent post! Wakefield’s notorious paper did not come out of nowhere. Not only did he try to start up an alternative immunization scheme, he was retained by a lawyer acting for an anti-vaccination campaign that already existed and was looking for evidence that the MMR vaccine was harmful. (See Brian Deer’s exposé for more.)
I don’t know anything more about the roots of anti-vaccination, but it would be very interesting to look into!
Great point, Neville. Wakefield was already motivated by a distrust of the MMR vaccine, of course. Thanks for pointing that out.
And even on top of that, according to at least one source (which I might be able to find again), at least 3 of his 12 cited autism cases were never confirmed to have autism… IE…1/4 of his ‘study’ never had what was claimed to have been caused BY HIS STUDY…
How nice is that?
Great discussion.
I also was a Mothering mom, but I had a couple experiences which made me question the party line from the medical community – my eldest was born around the time RotaShield (the first rotavirus vax) was taken off the market after several babies had intussusception. They introduced several new vaccines around that time, including varicella (which didn’t seem necessary to vax against, to me) and the heptavalent meningitis vax. First, my eldest had a bad reaction to the DTaP – very high fever, not reduced by antipyretics, and inconsolable screaming for 3 days – caused, her Dr confirmed, by a vax reaction. He noted in her chart she should never get another Pertussis booster, since reactions get more severe and she risks dying next time. (She did come down with Pertussis in middle school, and it was bad, but she didn’t die.) Next, my second baby *had* rotavirus – and because I breastfed her, she didn’t even act ill. It’s deadly for many babies – but not healthy breastfeeding babies. However, it made me question vaccination; I had now seen a ‘moderate’ vax reaction (because ‘severe’ reaction = death) and I had seen my other baby have an illness I was supposed to vax against, and she didn’t even act sick. Autism had nothing to do with my questions.
I am now 100% in favour of vax, and my kids are fully up to date, but I had many valid concerns, and didn’t appreciate being told ‘you just have to follow the vax schedule and do as you’re told’ as if I was being unreasonable.
Thank you for hosting an intelligent discussion.
Thanks for sharing your experiences!
Hi Rebecca,
First time reader; thanks for writing this. It’s the type of discussion I’ve been waiting to hear.
One quick comment re: “How about a free helpline where people can discuss their worries?” Many Ontario health units have a call centre staffed by Public Health Nurses who can answer questions about all sorts of things. Numbers for Toronto and Peel are below.
Toronto Public Health: 416-338-7600
Peel Public Health: 905-799-7700
Maybe not exactly what you had in mind, but helpful nonetheless.
Thanks.
Thank you, Greg. And thanks for posting those numbers.
BC has a free public health nurse phone line too. It’s 8-1-1.
Kristen
I’m so gld you wrote this. I too get frustrated when I hear (especially from the media) that anti-vaxxers are just doing what they are doing because of the risk of autism. No one I know who argues against vaccines uses autism as a reason. On top of that, I have a couple of friends who went to school for their chosen feild and LEARNED that vaccines are problematic (both are now chiropracters). I wish the media would talk to these people, who truly believe they have science backed reasons for avoiding vaccines instead of the very few crazy sounding Moms who say they’ve done their reseach but really mean that they’ve listened to a few anecdotes.
Thanks, Laura!
With respect – and, full disclosure, I am a midwife – I think you are conflating two aspects of midwifery care.
Midwives are experts in using non-pharmacologic methods of pain relief to give people the best chance of having an unmedicated labour. Midwives also hold up informed choice as a central aspect of the way that they provide care.
The former likely attracts people who, like you say, “reject the over-medicalization of birth”, some of whom – though not all, as some of the comments above point out – may also be suspicious of vaccination schedules, or be considered “fringe” groups.
The latter, though, I can’t support being a contributing factor to people’s decisions to reject vaccination except when someone already is a member of the above group. Although informed choice is a central tenet of midwifery care in Ontario, I have yet to have a discussion with a client about the use of drugs to stop a dangerous postpartum hemorrhage, or delivery by c-section in the event of a cord prolapse (an emergency in which the umbilical cord is presenting in front of the baby’s head) and have someone choose to reject these interventions. If the choice of whether to agree to childhood vaccines is a no-brainer (and, to be clear, except in extreme cases, I think it is), then offering people informed choice is not the problem.
It’s unfortunate that your experience of being provided with informed choice felt like being presented two (or three or four) unweighted choices. In most cases, I would say, one of the options usually comes out on top – for the clinician – but informed choice respects and recognises the autonomy of people to make the choice that makes the most sense for them.
Finally, I think that most physicians would be offended at the suggestion that informed choice is only being provided by midwives (especially for something like vaccinations which are not even in midwives’ scope). That said, my own personal experience of asking my children’s paediatrician about the wisdom of delaying vaccination while exclusively breastfeeding (more out of curiosity, because I knew I would face similar questions from clients as a clinician and I was interested in his interpretation of the scientific evidence) was met with a “Well, I would just hate for one of your babies to die.”
I completely agree with you that any clinician dismissing people’s concerns about vaccines as silly or using hyperbole to make a point only serves to increase the distrust that some people feel in the medical system and make them more inclined to seek out alternative positions. It comes across as defensive when a reasoned, evidence-based conversation about the risks and benefits of vaccinations seems like the proverbial unicorn.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment, Jill. I certainly had a wonderful experience using midwives for all three of my births and would recommend the experience to anyone. I don’t think midwifery is the problem, per se, but (as you say) does attract people who are suspicious of mainstream medicine overall. I do think midwives in Canada practice good medicine, but are also part of a culture that was susceptible to antivaxxing arguments.
Interestingly, I came to your blog via a facebook post and just found a link to this article underneath my friend’s link to your blog. There’s a rigorous, unbiased process of information collection for you. ;)
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2015/02/09/384877284/psychological-biases-play-a-part-in-vaccination-decisions
Great article,
I completely agree as I was thinking the same thing, anti-vaccine campaign is not only coming out of the Autism scare, but in fact comes from a larger discussion and campaign. I would add to what you said that there is a larger community than just people who are into healthy life-style. I would include in this a large contingent of religious communities (not just Amish or Christian Science) who are into this. When I had my first child in 2007 I was given a video by a friend who is a devout Christian of a doctor who gave a series of anti-vaccine lectures. This doctor was herself a devout Christian and framed the argument against vaccines in a pseudo-scientific and religious context. This was a bad combo and what happened is that my friend spread this info to everyone around so that a whole generation of children around her child are unvaccinated. She got all of the forms of school exemption as well. Interestingly enough she never had her children with a midwife, actually had a highly medicated birth with all of her babies! I on the other hand had completely unmedicated births in a hospital first with an OBGYN and then with a midwife. I read a lot of pros and cons about vaccines and ultimately we (in the West) have forgotten how bad it can get, and I strongly believe that this is a reflection of a larger socio-cultural trend (as someone has noted above) towards individualism and liberal ideals of ‘democratic’ societies. This trend towards individualism is what triggers many of these ideas. Unfortunately there is nothing we can do unless there is a larger societal transformation of consciousness. We have forgotten collective responsibility for others because we put the individual on a pedestal. THis of course is not to say that today’s modern medicine is not to blame for some of this. The same goes for the “big pharma.” Both are run as corporate entities, and big phrama without much social responsibility. I am critical of these entities and their warped social roles. But I also have a problem with the kind of I would say religiosity embedded in much of the ‘natural medicine’ language. Again, I agree that we need choices, consent and it is important to have natural medicine, but instead of religiously holding on to its doctrines, it is important to see how the two (mainstream medicine and natural) to work together. Both can become doctrinal. However, overall it is the large socio-cultural trend since the 1990s that privileges individual above all else. Thank you so much for your thoughtful blog!
Thanks so much for adding to the discussion.