Re: Consent for Innoculations

[Guest guest]

I was told by our (old, now fired) ped that it wasn't actually consent we were signing, it was acknowledgment of rec't of the VIS...

I do remember getting them, they were photocopied on pretty pink, yellow, blue and green paper and barely legible. The ONLY thing I was afraid of in 1997 were seizures from the DTP, so they assured my the DTaP was much, much safer...the odds were with us to not have a negative reaction. Wham, bam--45 days later we had a 45 minute sz resulting in hospitalization and non stop drugs, and then pdd-nos dx in buffalo.

Cris, Buffalo

ps-fired ped because I felt like I was returning to the scene of the crime each visit...as my daughter was declining more and more not only neurologically but her overall health and ped was acusing me of causing the harm. I almost choked her, and anyone who knows me well enough, knows I would have if our last conversation had been in person instead of over the phone.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 23:00:23 -0000 "Vicky Debold" <vdebold@...> writes:

If other people signed the same kind of "consent" document as I did, I doubt it would stand up in court as "informed consent." The VIS forms are very incomplete and misleading and the consent documents are laughable. I was never told about potential risks in detailed terms nor was I told about what was not known about the safety of the vaccine (turns out, they don't know very much). For any surgical procedure, this information routinely given. IMO, few, if any, parents were truly informed of the risks/benefits of various vaccines prior to consenting on behalf of their children. No one was told what ingredients were in the vaccines (some of which are common allergens - not to mention the heavy metals), nor the use of fetal tissue, and animal tissue including pork which is objectionable to several religious traditions. I think this is a legal issue that could be taken up. NVIC has been working on the "right to informed consent" issue all along.Vicky