Vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing parents’ reflections on the way parenthood changed their attitudes to vaccination

Having children compels parents to examine their vaccine beliefs, particularly if they are vaccine-hesitant or refuse all vaccines. Presently, little is known about the specific ways in which having children influences the vaccine beliefs of parents. This research examined how having children changed the attitudes of Australian vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing parents towards childhood vaccination. We asked 904 Australian parents who believed that having children changed their attitudes to vaccination to describe these changes. Parents’ responses were inductively, iteratively coded and thematically analysed. Themes were compared between parents who believed all vaccines should be refused, parents with varying degrees of vaccine hesitancy, and parents who were fully vaccine-accepting. Low numbers of responses from fully vaccine-accepting parents meant that this paper focused on mostly vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing vaccine parents. Five themes were identified. Having children prompted all parents to learn about vaccine choices. Hesitant and refusing parents’ interpreted vaccine choices through a lens of distrust of pharmaceutical companies and regulatory bodies overseeing vaccine safety. The distrust fuelled parents’ fears about vaccination risks, such as side effects. Parents became concerned about the scheduled timing of vaccinations, particularly of the Hepatitis B vaccine. Parents among the three groups that believed some or all vaccines should be refused reported that a vaccine permanently injured their child. This research contributes to understanding how having children affects the vaccine attitudes among vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing parents. Greater support for parents with negative vaccination experiences may prevent hesitant attitudes. The vaccination schedule needs to be communicated to parents better

The mad leading the blind: perceptions of the vaccine-refusal movement among Australians who support vaccination

Background: Vaccine refusal is shaped by the social ecology in which it occurs. How people who refuse vaccines are communicated to and treated may affect the nature and strength of their negative vaccine beliefs, and their responsiveness to health promotion messages. Yet little is known about how people who refuse vaccines are perceived by the public. Our research examined perceptions among pro-vaccine Australians of the vaccine-refusal movement. Methods: Descriptions of the vaccine-refusal movement by 2666 pro-vaccine Australians were analysed using thematic discourse analysis. Descriptive themes were identified via inductive, iterative coding. Discourse analysis techniques were then used to interpret latent beliefs about the vaccine-refusal movement. Results: Participants had negative and stigmatising perceptions of the vaccine-refusal movement. They believed the movement is dangerous, misinformed, and comprised of charlatans and fools who are unintelligent, selfish, overly emotional, conspiratorial and scientifically illiterate. Discursive analysis showed that these perceptions were underpinned by beliefs that people would have to be defective in some way to believe anti-vaccine rhetoric. Furthermore, perceptions were underpinned by beliefs that the movement spreads not only disease, but also dangerous ideas that were seen to attack the social order, institutions, values and reason. Participants′ intensely-negative views related to their inability to imagine why someone would refuse vaccines. Conclusions: This research provides a focused, qualitative account of public perceptions of the vaccine-refusal movement. The findings are concerning: stigma towards vaccine-refusing people may adversely affect their wellbeing and entrench their negative vaccine beliefs. The research suggests that more compassionate, nuanced discussion of vaccine refusal in the public sphere is needed. It also supports the need to systematically examine public attitudes towards vaccine refusal as a determinant of vaccine confidence

Factors influencing clinician prescribing of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs for inflammatory arthritis: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies

Abstract not availableAislinn F. Lalora, Joanne E. Brooker, Tomas Rozbroj, Samuel L. Whittle, Catherine L. Hill, Debra Rowetth, Rachelle Buchbinder, Denise A. O, Conno

‘I Think I Made The Right Decision … I Hope I'm Not Wrong’ . Vaccine hesitancy, commitment and trust among parents of young children

International audienceDuring the last decade, public health research has emphasised the growing public disaffection with vaccination. This contemporary vaccine hesitation (VH) refers to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines, as well as agreement despite doubt and reluctance. We investigated VH among French parents of young children, with an emphasis on two key features of VH: trust towards physicians and commitment to vaccination issues. We targeted two populations with contrasting socioeconomic profiles, using in‐depth interviews (n = 25). Most parents exhibited some kind of VH, with differentiated attitudes across vaccines, including acceptance despite enduring doubts, especially for vaccines already provided to older siblings (‘vaccine inertia’). Despite the rise of the Internet and social media, our participants still strongly relied on face‐to‐face interactions with peers and significant others. Most participants trusted their own physician but this was the result of a selection process: they had engaged resources to find a physician they could trust. Participants with contrasted socioeconomic profiles struggled with the same dilemmas, and they committed themselves to the same quest to find the ‘right’ physician. Nevertheless, parents with a higher socioeconomic status were able to engage more resources and use a wider repertoire of actions, and they also displayed greater health literacy