Recently Facebook connected me with some old friends from the neighborhood where I grew up. It’s amazing to connect with friends who have been out of reach for so long. But social networking can uncover some real differences.
Last week I commented on Jenny McCarthy video that pokes fun at her anti-vaccine agenda. Some of my Twitter posts feed into Facebook. This was picked up by one of my childhood neighbors who I learned has a son with autism. She took real offense to my link and sent along a message making her position clear.
While I felt bad that I may have been insensitive, I found myself in a strange position: Do I temper my contempt for the anti-vaccine movement in the face of a friend with an autistic child who may feel passionate about a connection? Should I feel comfortable making my case with a mother living with an autistic child? After all, who am I to tell a mother that she shouldn’t believe what she understands in her heart? Tricky stuff.
The side of me that supports parents as active participants in their child’s care wants to offer some weight to their opinion. As someone who makes a living working with moms I sincerely believe in their expertise and intuition. But the side of me that understands the history and epidemiology of vaccines and autism wants to put a stop to anything perceived as a controversy.
So in the end, despite the passionate beliefs of some close friends and dear patients, I take a firm public stance on the issue of vaccines and autism.
Perhaps more importantly I keep an open mind to the potential genetic and environmental contributors that might be part of the autism puzzle. We would be smart to take our lead from Allison Singer, former executive vice president of Autism Speaks, who recently resigned her post after recognizing that the vaccine-autism connection was losing its legs.
I was once told by a PR professional that “as the mother of a disabled child you can’t attack Jenny McCarthy.” While I recognize the dangers of criticizing Jenny McCarthy or any mother struggling with an autistic child, it’s important that we put a critical light on discredited associations and those who promote them.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Dr. V, meet my real-life friend Squid, whose middle child has autism. She wrote My Child Has Autism and I Vaccinate.
It wasn't an easy journey. When we first met, she was a member of the vaccines-are-implicated-in-autism tribe. Her decision to resume vaccination for her child with autism, and to vaccinate her younger child, were very, very difficult.
It still isn't an easy journey — she has friends who also have children on the spectrum, who are still in the vaccines = autism tribe.
I have another point, about the difference between stating the truth and "attack".
Screaming, interrupting,using foul language, and engaging in ad hominem arguments (Jenny McCarthy's modus operandi) is "attacking". Calmly pointing out that the weight of scientific evidence does not support a vaccine/autism linkage is not an attack. Pointing out a person's complete lack of scientific acumen isn't an "attack" — it is factual.
I forgot that this site scrubs HTML. The link is:
http://www.blogher.com/my-child-has-autism-and-i-vaccinate
While I realize that many parents are emotionally invested in believing the vaccine-autism link, that doesn't mean the link is true. To shy away from voicing an opposing argument or conviction in the face of such strong feeling is tempting. In the end though, it would only be a disservice to the families affected by autism. You, Allison Singer, Dr. Paul Otts and others are helping to combat the irrational fears and popular prejudices surrounding vaccines. As a parent of two fully vaccinated children under the age of three, I thank you for taking such a firm stance. The health of our community depends on you shining that critical light.
Seems to me it is easy-enough to: "Calmly pointing out that the weight of scientific evidence does not support a vaccine/autism linkage" (as Liz said).
More than adequate. Parents of both persuasions on the vaccine issue will respond as they will.
If you want to go the route of 'killing the messengers' of messages you disagree with, you might take the shadow of Orac, who blogs via nom-de-plume at Respectful Insolence. http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/
Forget Jenny McCarthy What about ormer head of the National Institute of Health, Dr. Bernadine Healy, and the former Chief Science Officer for the U. K., Dr. Peter Fletcher. What about the three cases settled under the table from vaccine court.
The mainstream medical community better update the party line. You are no longer arguing with emotional mothers. You are keeping your head in the sand, not telling the truth, and hurting children. Trust? I think it is just about gone…
http://www.fourteenstudies.org
One of the most thoughtful analyses of anti-vaccination fear and misinformation campaigns:
The Demonization of Immunization in Stanford Medicine Magazine, http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2009spring/article1.html