News roundup

Judge overrules mothers' objections to MMR vaccine

Clare Dyer legal correspondent, BMJ

A High Court judge in London last week ordered two girls aged 4 and 10 to be given the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination, overruling their mothers’ objections.

Mr Justice Sumner said the court would not normally force parents to vaccinate their children. However, he said, in the two cases before him, brought by fathers who were separated from their daughters’ mothers, the court had to decide what would be in the children’s best interests because the parents were in dispute. None of the parties to the case can be identified.

The 4 year old’s mother, a trainee midwife, said after the ruling: "It’s outrageous that in a free society a judge could make such a decision. To date, vaccination has not been compulsory in Britain.

"There are reasonable grounds for doubt about childhood vaccination. My right to protect my child in the face of that reasonable doubt is being taken away. We’re going to appeal."

The court ruling came on the same day as doctors called for the United Kingdom’s chief medical officers to resign over the target payment system for MMR vaccinations. GPs at the BMA local medical committees conference in London endorsed the safety of the vaccine but said the government’s insistence on linking doctors’ payments to the number of children immunised contributed to parents’ lack of confidence in the vaccine. Parents did not trust their GPs to give them disinterested advice.

The conference unanimously passed a motion urging ministers to "accept that the target payment system is a significant contributory factor to the continuing lack of parental confidence in the MMR vaccine."

Media scare stories about possible links between MMR and autism have caused the numbers of children vaccinated to drop, although the BMA, the World Health Organization, the Royal College of General Practitioners, and the Department of Health say no evidence exists that the triple vaccine causes autism. Some parents are choosing to pay privately for single vaccines.

A huge High Court group action against Glaxo Wellcome (now GlaxoSmithKline), makers of the vaccine, by parents who blame it for triggering autism in their children, is due to reach court next April.

Mr Justice Sumner was influenced by evidence from Simon Kroll, professor of paediatrics and molecular infectious diseases at Imperial College, London, and Steven Conway, consultant paediatrician at St James’s Hospital in Leeds. Both are members of the joint committee on vaccination and immunisation, an independent body that advises the government.

Mr Justice Sumner said the benefits of having the triple vaccination outweighed any risks. The single vaccines carried dangers because the child was exposed to the illnesses in the meantime.

"Recognising the anxieties of the mothers and that an adverse decision will be upsetting, the children’s best interests are served by receiving a programme of immunisations, and an order should be made," he said. He also ordered that the girls be immunised against other illnesses, including diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, and meningitis.
 

Rapid responses:

Read all Rapid responses

Power gone mad.

Aviva Sheb'a

bmj.com, 21 Jun 2003 [Full text]

Those who benefit by the risks others take.

axel Ellrodt

bmj.com, 21 Jun 2003 [Full text]

Re: Power gone mad.

L S Lewis

bmj.com, 22 Jun 2003 [Full text]

On mandatory vaccination

Philippe Beutels

bmj.com, 25 Jun 2003 [Full text]

Abridged text of this article PDF [abridged] of this article Email this article to a friend Respond to this article Read responses to this article PubMed citation Related articles in PubMed Download to Citation Manager Search Medline for articles by: Dyer, C. Alert me when: New articles cite this article

Collections under which this article appears: Drugs: immunological products and vaccines Medicine and the law (incl forensic medicine)

© 2003 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd