Two Sisters in UK Ordered to Get MMR

Avatar for Cmmelissa
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2008
Two Sisters in UK Ordered to Get MMR
Tue, 10-29-2013 - 1:39pm

When their parents were married, they agreed not to vaccinate their daughters in light of the controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine in the late 90s.   Now the parents are divorced, and the dad wants the girls to be vaccinated because the of increase of measle outbreaks: 

The father of the two girls says that this change, combined with an outbreak of measles in Swansea late last year, changed his mind in January 2013 about whether his daughters should be given the MMR jab. He says he was worried these diseases could have serious consequences.

According to the text of the court decision, seen by BBC Newsnight, the father's solicitor wrote to the girls' mother in January seeking her agreement that they should now be vaccinated, and saying that if she did not agree he would take the matter to court.

The mother did not agree and the matter eventually came before the Family Division of the High Court.

A court-appointed welfare officer who spoke extensively to the girls said that neither of them wanted the vaccination.

The children were particularly concerned about the ingredients in the vaccine, which include animal-based materials; one of the girls is a vegan.

However, the officer said that when she asked them what would happen if they became ill with measles, mumps or rubella and needed medicine, they clearly had not thought about what the ingredients in that medicine might be.

The welfare officer said both children had been strongly influenced by their mother, who was very anxious about the jab.

Read the complete article at:

Do you think that the courts have the right to enforce vaccinations? 

Avatar for cupcakebabe
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-09-2011
Tue, 10-29-2013 - 3:18pm

In this case, I think the father established his reasoning better than the mother did which is why he won in court. Should the court intervene? Absolutely, when it comes down to the reasons why. What were her reasons for not vaccinating? The article doesn't really say other than that the kids were heavily influenced by her and she is anxious over the jab (though I'd assume it's due to autism as they mention Wakefield). 

I think the court made the right decision.

Community Leader
Registered: 07-26-1999
Wed, 10-30-2013 - 12:59pm
While I don't agree that courts should be getting into these issues, even as a non-vaccinating parent, if the mother was solely worried about autism, these girls were well passed the age where it would have been known if they already had any sort of autism issues, and IF the fear was them developing autism because of the vaccinations, they honestly are well passed that age and I would be more inclined to go ahead and agree to the vaccinations. If there were other reasons, I suppose and the parents could not agree, since the mother's points were not covered in the article, then I can see where the judge may lean towards the dad's reasonings.