Child Care Benefit and Non-vaxers - Query

[Ponyboy]

Hi to all!

Just wondering if there are any non-vaxers out there that have successfully got the child care benefit? And also if they got the Immunisation allowance??

I was discussing with my mother how due to us not vaxing our daughter we won't be eligible for the child care benefit - she said that's like discrimination.

Has anyone claimed this as their child being exempt from immunisations? If so, how do you go about this?

Thanks!

[MamaSage]

If you have a concious objection from the Dr you are still eligible for the said benefits.

[Kamaikia]

Contact centerlink - basically you just have to find a doctor who agrees with your decision and they sign the relevant paperwork - you will need a good reason not to be doing it though.
You will need this peice of paper when enrolling in day care, school etc anyway.
You also get the immunisation payment - not sure how you will go about this. This payment is automatically paid between 18 - 20 months if immunisations are up to schedule.

Oh and just my opinion but I don't think its descimination in any way - more a majority rules kind of thing when it comes to immunisations.

Not having a go but curious and nosy (:D ) - why is it you decided not to immunise your child. Feel free to ignore this question if its too personal.

[Ponyboy]

My husband and I have done a fair bit of research on the vaccination topic (I'm a librarian so think my research skills are pretty good), and from the information found on both sides of the debate we wish not to take the risk of our daughter getting any of the side effects - many that are not reported or recorded. And I also think the ingredients of vaccinations are quite toxic. Natural immunity is mother nature's way of controlling the population. I'm quite prepared to take responsibility should our daughter get any of the childhood diseases to which vaccinations are provided.

Another reason is our daughter was born 6 weeks early and as a result had quite a traumatic introduction to our world. She had numerous needles, drips, tube feeding and other awful experiences. I don't wish to put her through more trauma.

I've also found that even though my mother had us kids vaccinated when we were kids, we still got the diseases. Although one may argue we got a lesser strain of it, how does one know what strength of strain one would get vaccinated or not!!

As said before, vaccination is a personal issue and I don't hold anything against those that vaccinate their children.

[middlecm]

Neither of my boys are vaccinated (21mths and 4mths) and we receive both Family Tax Benifit A and B. Also I noticed that we where paid for the immunisation allowance (on the bank statement) as the taxation office cant discriminate if you object to the immunisations.

Just have your doctor fill in the 'Concienious Objection Form' (sorry about the spelling) that they will have at the surgury and then send to medicare. When you fill out your Centrelink forms there is a box to tick if you have a concienious objection to the immunisations.

May I add that my boys are both robust and healthy and rarely ill.

Christine
Callum (21mths) and Aaron (4mths)

[Kamaikia]

Sharon I just wanted to say thank you for answering my question. Its in my nature to question most things but I have found that when I have asked this question to others they have gotten deffensive and refused to answer. This attitude has in no way helped me to understand the reasons behind this decision .
So thankyou for taking the time to share your thoughts.

While I have chosen to immunise I fully understand why some choose not to and respect that decision.

[jessgray]

when i did some reading up on the immunisation alowance i read somewhere members of a church could be exempt as well

[iamasaint]

I understand your feelings but please be sooo careful if your child grows up playing with other children, or touches the shopping trolley or is in daycare, etc. So many childhood illnesses are contagious at least a week before the rash or diagnosis comes out. And with the threat of so many children falling ill to meningitis - it's a scary place. My son was born at 28 weeks so he had a huge traumatic entry (and so did we!) And because his immune system was so low - I chose to vaccinnate him to lessen the possible threat of childhood disease. Anyway, just be careful and guard your little angel...

[defa]

I have to hold my tongue here a bit as I am for immunisation but for your question...

Why do you think you have the right to clam the money if you don't want to get your children done to me that is like claming the doll when you have a job...

The money is there to encourage people to get there children vax as it, is going cost a lot more when all these baby that are not vaxed start to get sick with all these disease..

I understand if your child can't have the immunisations for health reasons.

SharonU (http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/member.php?u=6278)
You said

"Another reason is our daughter was born 6 weeks early and as a result had quite a traumatic introduction to our world. She had numerous needles, drips, tube feeding and other awful experiences. I don't wish to put her through more trauma."

Getting a few needles in your daughter’s legs isn't putting her through trauma but getting whooping cough because she wasn't vaxed would be..
I don't understand...

Hugs for all your bubs vaxed or not..
And i hope they all stay health and happy little bub's

[shed]

The money is there to encourage people to get there children vax as it, is going cost a lot more when all these baby that are not vaxed start to get sick with all these disease..


The money is an incentive to encourage people to complete the vaccination schedule because many people get the first vaccinations and then don't bother getting the rest.

If you have decided not to vax you have made a conscious decision. This can't be compared to having incompleted vaxes due to laziness or forgetfulness. This is why they pay it. Its an incentive to finish what has been started, not a bribe to start it in the first place.

[Pippi Longstocking]

The money is there to encourage people to get there children vax as it, is going cost a lot more when all these baby that are not vaxed start to get sick with all these disease..



Nope, that's incorrect. The immunisation allowance was part of the original maternity payment. It was decided that due to parental apathy, vaccinations were being neglected so a part of the maternity payment was withheld in order to encourage parents to either complete the vaccination schedule or submit their conscientious objectors form. To withhold this money from non-vaccinating parents is called "discrimination" ;) .
3 of my four vaccinated children have had whooping cough. My unvaccinated child has not had whooping cough. hmm, in my personal anecdotal limited and therefore completely irrelevant experience :D , it is the vaccinated children that "start to get sick with all these disease.."

Please understand that the majority of people who choose not to vaccinate their children are intelligent educated parents who have spent a large amount of time reading and researching to make sure they are making the best possible choice for their children. We tend not to be ignorant, nor easily swayed by surprisingly unconvincing arguments such as 'well what if ya kid gets sick?!" The very reason we choose NOT to vaccinate is because we don't want our kids to get sick.

That being said, I completely respect those that do choose to vaccinate their kids. I acknowledge that it is a very difficult decision to make and respect any INFORMED decision regardless of which side of the vaccination fence they happen to sit.

[Pippi Longstocking]

Heh, and after all of that, I forgot to answer the OP :o .

Like others have said, all you need is a GP to sign a conscientious objectors form. The GP will ask you why you are choosing to refuse the vaccinations. It is a simple matter of explaining your reasons.
Your mum is right, it is discrimination to refuse you your entitlements due to vaccination status.

[AM]

It is a simple matter of explaining your reasons.

It was even simpler than that for me!
I just said please sign this form for me, and I had that "Don't muck with me!" look in my eye, and he asked if it was an informed decision, and I said "Yes, it sure is!" and that was that.

I'm pretty sure you need give no explanation, having the form itself is explanation enough, but the HCP is supposed to 'inform you' of the risks, and the part that they sign is to attest that they have done this.

So don't let them give you a hard time, your decision is actually none of their business.

[Pippi Longstocking]

Oh you are lucky Angie! I got fully interrogated, the doctor was so bl00dy rude! She barked questions at me, couldn't refute what I was saying so just said illuminating and helpful things like "rubbish!" and when I said "how so?" she couldn't answer.
I haven't been back to see her, she is awful. :thumbsdown:

[Alisonp]

Them - Unfortunately most of the doctors I have met know very little about the benefits and risks of immunisation. As you know :wave: I am very pro-vax (hey, I used to work for the FDA) but I have found that unfortunately, most GPs have very little education in this area. Medical degrees thesedays have to cover so much they rarely go into much detail in one particular topic.

However, there are doctors (usually those involved in research projects with some academic appointments) or infectious diseases specialists who do know their stuff - in detail. I'm sure they would have been able to answer your questions easily (not sure they could have convinced you though :devil6: as you say your mind was already made up).

Sadly, there are very few of these specialists and they are constantly in demand treating very sick people.

[AM]

said illuminating and helpful things like "rubbish!"

So that's what they go to medical school to learn:) I always wondered!:laughing:

Actually, the only comment my doc made as he signed the form was he mumbled "Well I suppose you'll get away with it because of herd immunity" and I smiled sweetly and left! :)

A lot of people I know refuse to be drawn into debate, and simply keep repeating the mantra " I have fully informed myself of the risks and benefits of both vaxing and of not vaxing, please sign my form!!"

[the_queen]

to the OP - if you had whooping cough then your body has anti-bodies against the disease, which are passed on during breastfeeding.

[AM]

to the OP - if you had whooping cough then your body has anti-bodies against the disease, which are passed on during breastfeeding.

Has that been proven beyond doubt?
I always thought that was a bit of a grey area?
To your knowledge, is it just Pertussis, or other things as well...?:detective:

[the_queen]

ooh now you've got me, I'll have to unlatch this child and go dig up the books I read on the topic!! My doctor said that to me though, that breastfeeding is the number one best thing you can do for your child's immune system, and it's even better if you had the diseases when you were a kid. I told him that I had measles and chicken pox, so he said that the anti-bodies would be passed on to DS.

Hang on - I will come back and answer that question.

And, just a thought to ponder while I find that info - has vaccination been proven beyond a doubt? How many double blind studies have been done regarding the effectiveness of vaccines? As I understand it, vaccinations do appear to have an effect, ie it lessens the chance of catching the disease, and if you do catch it, it will be a mild case. BUT has that been proven beyond doubt?? Or is it just a case of "well, it seems to work, so let's keep doing it" kinda like accupuncture...?

:chef: :detective: (That's my code for "food for thought" I think it's pretty clever, but then i'm a clever**** :laughing:)

I'll be back.

[AM]

I just got my copy of "Aroha" in the mailbox (the NZ La Leache League mag) and what did it have in it? A table titled

PROTECTIVE EFFECTS OF BREASTFEEDING AGAINST INFECTIOUS DISEASES

Diarrhea - 13weeks bf minimum gives 7 years protection (Howie 1990)

Otitis Media (middle ear) - 4 months bf minimum gives 3 years protection (Duncan et al1993)

Respiratory Infections - 15 weeks bf minimum gives 7 years protection (Wilson et al 1998)

Wheezing Bronchitis - bf time not specified - gives 6-7 years protection (Burr et al 1993, Porro et al 1993)

Haemophilius Influenza, type b - bf time not specified - gives 10 years protection (Silfverdal et al 1997)

Hodgkins Disease - 6 months bf minimum gives protection, unspecified timeframe. (Davis 1998)

A little different to what we were talking about, doesn't take into account the mothers personal immunity status, but interesting nevertheless! And I'm sure they aren't suggesting bf babies NEVER get these things, it is probably just a measurable amount of protection when guaged against the control.

[the_queen]

Thanks for posting that Angie - I think it's especially interesting about the HIB. :thumbsup:


Also, I found the book I was looking for, here's what it said about BFing and antibodies:

"During this time the child should be breast-fed and therefore receive antibodies from the mother's milk. This passive immunity will last till the child's system matures sufficiently to look after itself. The protection from breast-feeding is optimal only if the mother herself has full immunity ie has antibodies from the real infection. Antibodies from vaccinations do not seem to be effective."

(Please ntoe: I don't know how to cite correctly:D) from pg 36 of "Vaccination: It's your informed choice" by Dr Peter Baratosy (MB BS, PhD, Diploma of Acupuncture, Diploma of Clinical Hypnotherapy, Fellow of the Australian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine, Member of International Lasertherapy Association)

This makes total sense to me because the couple of times I have been sick since DS was born, I get sick but he doesn't. He's not getting the virus from me - he's getting the antibodies so therefore even though I'm still kissing him and being close with him, he doesn't catch the virus from me.


I do have other info about vaccinations, links etc, and to avoid arguments I won't post them here - if anyone is interested and wants to learn more please PM me. Please compare the information I will give you to the "official" vaccination website at http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/
Decide for yourself which source is trying to educate you, and which source is trying to patronise you :D

[Alisonp]

"During this time the child should be breast-fed and therefore receive antibodies from the mother's milk. This passive immunity will last till the child's system matures sufficiently to look after itself. The protection from breast-feeding is optimal only if the mother herself has full immunity ie has antibodies from the real infection. Antibodies from vaccinations do not seem to be effective."



Actually the protection from breastfeeding is optimal only if the immunity to the specific disease (natural or generated in response to vaccination) is largely mediated by specific antibodies. For many diseases, antibodies don't play a major role and it is the specific T cells that protect the person from the infection. Unfortunately, these cells aren't passed on in the same way as antibodies are through the milk.

Since most of the pathology of whooping cough is caused by the pertussis toxin then an antibody response can be protective (and can be passed from the mother to the baby). The vaccine is designed to stimulate antibodies against the toxin so in essense the transferred protection from a mother to child is the same whether it is made from vaccination or from natural immunity.

Unfortunately, like many large molecules, the body gradually loses antibodies over time so eventually the baby will hardly have any antibodies left to protect them. Passively transferred antibodies only work if they are in a high enough concentration. Without vaccination, the baby can't make any more of them themselves...that is unless they get the real disease.

[Ponyboy]

Thanks to all who replied with the answer to my OP and thanks to those that contributed other information about vaccinations. Funny how a simple question can then turn into a debate - but at least we are talking about it!!! :)

I have since got my GP to sign a conscientious objection form - at first relunctantly but I said I'm a librarian and have done my research on both "sides of the fence" so she signed it. She seemed more concerned that I would blame her should my DD get any of the diseases that have vaccinations.

[the_queen]

Actually the protection from breastfeeding is optimal only if the immunity to the specific disease (natural or generated in response to vaccination) is largely mediated by specific antibodies. For many diseases, antibodies don't play a major role and it is the specific T cells that protect the person from the infection. Unfortunately, these cells aren't passed on in the same way as antibodies are through the milk.

Since most of the pathology of whooping cough is caused by the pertussis toxin then an antibody response can be protective (and can be passed from the mother to the baby). The vaccine is designed to stimulate antibodies against the toxin so in essense the transferred protection from a mother to child is the same whether it is made from vaccination or from natural immunity.

Unfortunately, like many large molecules, the body gradually loses antibodies over time so eventually the baby will hardly have any antibodies left to protect them. Passively transferred antibodies only work if they are in a high enough concentration. Without vaccination, the baby can't make any more of them themselves...that is unless they get the real disease.

Are you a doctor Alisonp?

[shed]

What is the status on rubella immunity being passed on?

I have had rubella, the real thang, not the needle, and I am breastfeeding my baby. I had it 14 years ago.

Gimme the info and the reference if you have it. :thumbsup:

Ta

ApprenticeMomma, i loved that info from Aroha, thanks.

[Alisonp]

The_Queen: No I am not a medical doctor. I have a PhD in Microbiology and Immunology. The reason that I know a fair bit about pertussis is that I worked in a lab in the states (FDA) that contained scientists who were regulators of the pertussis vaccines and they did research on the genetics of the pertussis toxin. I worked on something else myself (anthrax) but I went to a lot of seminars on pertussis vaccination:sleeping:

Shed - Sorry I don't know that much about rubella :o . When I did a quick scan of PubMed I couldn't find anything very relevant other than an old study showed only 25% of children have any rubella antibody once they are 12mo old (rubella antibody can be passed through the placenta or by b/f). Interestingly, the vaccination worked equally well between b/f and f/f infants.
Sato H, Albrecht P, Reynolds DW, Stagno S, Ennis FA. Transfer of measles, mumps, and rubella antibodies from mother to infant. Its effect on measles, mumps, and rubella immunization.
Am J Dis Child. 1979 Dec;133(12):1240-3.

[theycallmemum]

That's me, I won't debate it. I don't vax, I have very valid reasons. I respect those that do vax and in return I expect the same respect.

[jade21887]

Definately ask your drs for one of those forms. I am a vaccinator, but must admit I only did it because my dr vaccinates his kids. I think that vaccination is one of the many debates that happens between parents. I say go with what works!! I feel it is a lot harder to go against the grain.