Vaccination
campaign suffering from Blair's reticence
18.02.2002
By BRONWYN SELL in LONDON
British
MPs are refusing to use babies to promote their political campaigns - at least
not their own babies. And people are suspicious.
As
a measles outbreak threatens, Prime Minister Tony Blair is urging British
parents to use the triple MMR (measles, mumps rubella) vaccine on their
children.
However,
for privacy reasons he refuses to confirm whether he's had his 20-month-old
son, Leo, vaccinated. And the MMR vaccination campaign, already hurt by bad
press and studies linking it to autism, is suffering from his silence.
Until
quite recently, politicians' children would have been the first to be dragged
into the spotlight to make a political point for their parents.
But
a new era of jealous privacy has enveloped Westminster. Blair and his ministers
refuse to reveal even the most mundane details about their children, and the
public trusts their silence as much as it trusted their predecessors' blatant
publicity.
The
confusion is creating inaction. The number of parents getting their toddlers
vaccinated is dropping, at a time health authorities are increasingly concerned
about the risk of a measles epidemic.
To
prevent epidemics, 95 per cent of the population needs to be covered by
inoculation. The proportion now covered by MMR has fallen from more than 90 per
cent to 82 per cent and is as low as 65 per cent in some parts of London.
Blair's
refusal to disclose has compounded public doubt over a vaccine which is claimed
to cause autism and other conditions. One thousand families are preparing to go
to court to try to hold the triple vaccine manufacturers responsible for their
children's ill-health.
Their
claims were legitimised in a widely criticised report by gastroenterologist
Andrew Wakefield, who suggested in 1998 there was a link between MMR,
inflammatory bowel disease and autism.
Other
parents are calling for Blair to come clean about Leo, to give them some cause
for confidence.
Guardian
commentator and father-of-three Andrew Rawnsley wrote that he was prepared to
accept the opinion of the majority of the world's scientists, who declare MMR
to be safe. "The outbreak of measles in south London is barely a mile away
from where we live. For me, the balance of risks weighs in favour of MMR.
"While
I have a lot of sympathy with the Blairs' desire to protect the privacy of
their children, the Prime Minister has too often invoked 'the kids' in his
rhetoric and too frequently used their images to enhance himself.
"He
cannot then turn round and say Leo's treatment is out of bounds in the case of
this controversy.
"The
result has been to further inflame this crisis. Not because parents will
necessarily follow the Blairs' example, but because they will not trust the
Government's advice while its leader is furtive about his own child.
"My
own guess is that Baby Blair did have the jab recently, but only after much
agonising by his parents. There is some history of autism on Cherie's side of
the family. Instead of being so slippery about it, Blair could have shared his
own anguish about the decision. That would have made him a more credible
salesman of the Government's advice."
Blair's
critics in opposition and in the media are criticising him for putting the
privacy of his child before the health of many thousands of toddlers, when he
could restore calm in one media statement.
His
statements are getting closer to confirming that he has had Leo done although
the general opinion is that he delayed the vaccination for a few months. There
was also speculation he had strayed away from MMR in favour of separate
vaccinations for each disease.
Blair
last week gave his strongest hint that Leo had received the jab. "I am not
going to go into details about our children, but ... a lot of what appeared in
the papers about us not wanting to have this, or having three separate
vaccinations, is complete nonsense." He said he would never advocate
something he did not think was safe for his children.
He
rejected the suggestion that confirming Leo had been vaccinated would draw a
line under the matter. "Would it? I doubt it. We would then have been
asked all the follow-up questions across the whole range of campaigns and
pieces of advice that the Government gives."
The
Government is said to be asking television networks to donate airtime for
advertising campaigns to spread the vaccination message - which would be the
biggest health campaign since safe sex messages were broadcast during the
mid-1980s Aids crisis.
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.