VACCINES: There Is No Answer.

If only we shared as much love on Facebook as we do divisive and oversimplified vaccination memes. IF ONLY.

AUTISM LINK. HERD IMMUNITY. Yes. I know. But see those people on the other side of the fence? They also want their kids alive and healthy. BUT WE'RE IN AN OVERPOPULATED WORLD WITH DISEASES THAT MUTATE AND THIS SH*T IS HARD TO MANAGE.

But it's also straightforward in a way. No amount of justified distrust of big pharma can make the following statements untrue. Vaccines are not guaranteed to work. But that doesn't mean they never work. Vaccines contain toxins. But that doesn't mean they will always cause harm.

The human body has a system to deal with toxins. But sometimes the detoxification system will fail to do its job. So sometimes vaccines will cause harm or death. Definitely not always.

The human body has a system to deal with diseases. But sometimes the immune system will fail to do its job. So sometimes diseases will cause harm or death. Definitely not always.

So let me quickly get real about what that means.

You truly do not know whether your child would be saved or harmed by a vaccine. You can guess. You can somewhat educatedly guess. But you do not know.

Because the data needed to get a precise risk analysis? It is extremely broad. And there are some big unkowns that can make all the difference to your individual situation.

First let's weigh the risk of disease. We have to know the likelihood of contraction in vaccinated persons relative to those unvaccinated. Then we have to know the likelihood of permanent damage or mortality when contracted. Those statistics exist. If you ask me, they're fuzzy as sh*t because they hinge on decades of data and how the eff do you account for population growth, sanitation conditions, other medical developments, and general health? Or even random sh*t like how antibacterial hand soap is affecting human immune systems and germ strength?

But still, we get statistically maybe-somewhat-accurate trends. But even so. Relying on probability to determine your risk is inherently inaccurate for an individual when one single occurrence can instantaneously turn the numbers the way that only contagious diseases can.

And the other side of the equation is an equal b*tch to compute. Vaccine injury and death rates exist. And here you have some more fuzzy as sh*t numbers because are they under-reported by doctors or over-reported since the timing of vaccines coincides with that of symptom onset for neurological problems that occur even without vaccines?

But maybe they give us some general idea. But then we get M. Night Shyamalaned again. Because can you read your genetic code? Me either. And toxin exposure from sources other than vaccines? Maybe you have a general sense of your child's, but how much BPA did those kids in the statistics chew on before they got vaccinated? And how much GMO food did they eat? No one's controlling for that. And if one does control for BPA or GMO or OPP (yeah you know... nevermind) exposure, what about all the toxins they don't even know about? The ones in non-BPA plastic that they haven't studied yet? The ones in perfume? All the ones in all the places that you'll only know about in twenty years? And are they ever even going to try to isolate the variable of those increasingly flashy HD strobe lights marketed as educational television? These other toxins matter. It's science.

What you end up with is two amorphous gray blobs on each side of the scale. But hey, it's great for you if you can convince yourself that it's a big black mass against a tiny white spec. Peace of mind. Enjoy it.

But it'd be better for our collective peace if we all just recognize that it's a crap shoot. On the count of three, let's all stop pretending our guesses are answers, and just respect each other's guesses.

Because get ready. Sh*t's about to get cray.

First. Any brain scientist will tell you that what people may label an "instinct" is actually the result of your brain's unconscious observations and synthesis of said observations.

Second. If you haven't watched the documentary I Am, go do it. It explains the very very real reality that information is transferred in ways other than through our senses and conscious mind. This isn't trippy, this is modern physics. Okay. Maybe it's both. But, for reals, molecules are connected in ways we LITERALLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND (and when I say we, I mean physicists too, because I have so much in common with them). As such, information is passed via electromagnetic fields. And in case you didn't know, the heart's electromagnetic field is FIVE THOUSAND times the size of the brain.

So all I'm gonna say is this. What if all of us moms were making the right decisions for our kids and we didn't even know it? What if, collectively, we were unconsciously avoiding every avoidable instance of neurological damage and death? And here's the big one: What if we all just assume that to be true?

KIDS DON'T NEED LIMITS. You heard me.

Okay, they need DON'T PLAY WITH KNIVES limits. I'm not talking about safety limits. I'm not an idiot.

That said, my money's on close to 90% of people still thinking that I AM an idiot. NO WAY THIS LADY HAS A DEGREE IN CHILD PSYCHOLOGY.

You're right. I don't. But I have something way better: MEMORY.

Having my memory is better than having a degree for the following reason. Child psychology is like literally every other ology. There is never one answer and there are always two schools of thought. I wish I realized that sooner.

Back before I had a kid, I used to watch Supernanny every Friday night with my then-pregnant sister. This tradition had me convinced that I should not follow in my sister's pregnant footsteps because TIMEOUT? Like ENFORCE it? And MAKE a reward chart? With my HANDS? Remember to USE it? CONSISTENTLY? Not my thang.

Being single at the time, I wasn't too worried about what a terrible parent I'd make right then and there. But I did make mental notes in case I ever I met a nice guy with whom I wanted to make a baby.

I quickly forgot everything Supernanny taught me, time passed, I met my husband, and then we decided we could raise a human. At some point, I got a Supernanny flashback, and thought DAMN. I still don't know how not to raise a jerk. I better figure that sh*t out.

But then, I found a blog post that linked to an article, which led me to buy a book. And that book petted me on the head and told me it would be okay and that Supernanny was full of sh*t.

That book was Alfie Kohn's Unconditional Parenting. It said that there was an alternative to the rewards/punishment model, and it was good. And that was about all I needed to hear because I'd never be consistent enough for that sh*t anyway. But, talking to and engaging my kid? Well that sounded downright familiar.

As a kid, I never encountered timeout or saw a reward chart. And since I was a REALLY well-behaved kid, everything Alfie said made some hardcore sense to me.

BUT. Everywhere you look on the internets, it's like CONTROL YOUR HEATHENS. RULES. TIMEOUTS. LIMITS. CHILDREN WITHOUT LIMITS SCARE THEMSELVES.

Limits. Wait. I didn't really encounter too many of those either. I mean, my parents told me not to do dangerous things, but I was perfectly happy not to hurt myself or anyone else, so they didn't have to enforce those. So. Was I scared as a kid?

Nooo. (And be real. Do you ever remember feeling fear when you were in a particularly wild or persistent mood as a child? Or did you feel excited and determined? That's what I thought.)

The very few times my parents gave me limits, it was the LIMITS that felt SCARY.

So I thank God that I was born to my mom and dad, who were usually open for negotiation. But the rare times that they weren't, I felt panic. Like being trapped or invisible. Literally helpless. No power, no input.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN I CAN'T SIT BEHIND THE DRIVER'S SEAT? WHY IS IT EMILY'S SEAT? SHE GETS IT EVERY DAY. WHY DON'T I GET A TURN? I DON'T KNOW WHY I WANT TO SIT THERE BUT I DO. WHAT DO YOU MEAN THAT'S NOT A REASON? THIS FIT I'M THROWING? THAT MEANS THIS IS IMPORTANT. WILL NOTHING MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND ME?

Now, as a mom who has had no choice but to leave her 11-month old at daycare even on the days that he frowns when we start to leave, I know we sometimes don't have the option to do what our children prefer. And that's okay. But that's also exactly why explanation and negotiation are GIFTS to parenting.

Fortunately for me, Finley forgets about us before we're even out the door. But as for me, I did not take so easily to preschool.

I DON'T WANT TO BE LEFT AT PRESCHOOL MOM. WHAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? WHY AREN'T MY WORDS WORKING? DO I HAVE TO SCREAM AND RUN OUT THE DOOR TOWARD THE ROAD? DONE. WHY IS YOUR CAR SO FAST? HOW DID THIS TEACHER CATCH ME? IS THAT PHONE ON THE WALL A TOY OR IS IT REAL? CAN I CALL DAD? I NEED DAD'S WORK NUMBER.

Three days later, negotiations began. Turned out there was a workable alternative to being forced out of my quiet home which I had peacefully enjoyed for the previous four years on a daily basis and thrown into the mutiny of 20 other kids with their power politics all up in my face first thing in the morning. I went relatively happily to a babysitter who had a daughter just younger than me, and that little girl happened to do whatever I told her to do. That was much more my speed. And the next year I went very happily off to kindergarten and never looked back. Crisis averted. Hear, hear: Negotiation.

I HOPE no one thinks that it's a smart idea NOT to offer kids an explanation when there really is no alternative. But, I DO know that some people think you shouldn't negotiate. I know. It's the experts who say that negotiation is the opposite of limits and limits make kids feel safe.

Yo experts, I'm really happy for you, I'll let you finish, but you're wrong. Because I remember what it was like firsthand. Feeling safe is the opposite of feeling helpless and powerless.

Alfie is far from the only expert who encourages parenting beyond rewards/punishments/limits. Now. Some experts (like this lady) talk about setting empathetic limits. Well. Semantics. Having empathetic limits means that you're taking as much input from your kid as you can, with health and safety in mind. That's negotiation. And I guess I just don't consider negotiation to be in the same realm as Supernanny-style limits.

So what I'm really saying is this: Please don't believe Supernanny-style experts just because it's easier for them to pimp their sh*t and because they yell louder than the pro-empathy experts. Yes, it's straightforward to tell you to demand obedience and depending on your kid's reaction, distribute either a timeout or gold star. But your kid is capable of more than obedience. He's capable of doing what's right not just because he'd otherwise have to sit on a stool for five minutes, but because it's RIGHT. Because you model what's RIGHT by modeling EMPATHY. That is, you took the time to get his input to reach a mutually agreeable solution. Because you showed him that his feelings matter. Because kids learn by example, not by demand.

If you're not convinced, that's cool. Maybe you're right. Maybe your kids can't handle their own power. Maybe they're more suited to be controlled by their superiors for their whole lives. Everyone's different. Genetics and all that. ;-)