'The Government has a patronising attitude'

My three older children all had MMR, but I am so alarmed by the growing incidence of autism that - even though I am completely bemused by the science and not fully persuaded either way - I decided I simply wouldn't take the risk with my youngest son, now two.

He had the three separate jabs. This cost £180 and entailed a lot of trailing back and forth to a clinic round the back of Eltham High Street. There were always people there who seemed to have come halfway across the country.

I feel strongly that the Blairs shouldn't have to tell us about their children's medical history (Cherie's smear tests next?) . What does make me angry is the Government's patronising attitude: you parents can't possibly make responsible decisions. It doesn't trust parents to go through with all three jabs. This is absurd: parents agonise about this decision and want to do right by their babies.
Geraldine Bedell, feature writer

'Parents who don't vaccinate are selfish'

My four-year-old, BiBi, is due to have her MMR booster next week. She will have it because the chance of her developing autism/bowel problems is smaller than the risk of her being left deaf/blind/brain damaged, or dead, from measles. Parents who do not vaccinate their children put others at risk. This is selfish and small-minded.
Kim Bunce, researcher

'We are becoming far too risk-averse as a country'

Fred, Daisy and Mo all had MMR because, as gambling parents, the odds stacked up.

There are three points to make: first, the preponderance of columnists arguing from the personal to the general. Second, there is a weight of research in favour of the MMR, and then there is Dr Wakefield. He has spent 15 years researching the area and can't bring himself to admit there isn't much to say. He can scaremonger if he wants to, but we shouldn't follow like sheep.

Third, parents do not understand odds. They'll be told there is a one-in-a-thousand chance of their child having Down's syndrome and think this is significant, yet ignore the fact that one in four mothers miscarry. This is symptomatic of a country that is becoming so risk-averse that it is in danger of becoming stationary (see reponse to Hatfield). Their refusal to accept the odds could damage others.
Will Buckley, sports writer

'Our children lapsed into unconsciousness'

I have three children. The first two have had the MMR. Both had to be hospitalised after the jab as they developed high temperatures and lapsed into unconsciousness.

With the oldest, they told us they thought it was meningitis. Hospital staff were adamant it was nothing to do with the MMR. Our second child had the same reaction. Hospital staff again insisted it was not the MMR.

Our GP candidly told us later that he thought it was the MMR. He has refused to give our third child the MMR, saying the only way we can give her the jab is in hospital.

In just five years the medical profession has gone from total denial to telling us the MMR is dangerous for our third child. Scary.
Martin Love, sub-editor

'Memories of the BSE denials are too recent'

My partner and I decided more than a year ago that our son, now two, would not have MMR, and nothing in the Government's propaganda campaign has persuaded us that this was not a wise decision. The equally vehement official denials that humans could catch BSE are too recent a memory. Our son is receiving separate jabs.
David Rose, feature writer

'Was I leading my little lambs to the slaughter?'

Controversy was at fever pitch last year when my younger son, now two, came of age for the jab.

I did all the research I could, asked my doctor whether the single jab was available (it was not) and decided in favour of the MMR. It was not an easy decision, but with MMR take-up in my area low I decided my children were at greater risk of getting measles if unprotected than the unproven risk of autism if given the jab.

I felt like I was leading my little lambs to potential slaughter and for months felt uneasy, alert to signs of autism. Had a single jab been available, I would have taken it.
Terry Slavin, sub-editor

'Blair's hypocrisy has led to heartache'

Tony Blair has irritated me over the years, but this is the first issue where he has driven me to raging anger. His hypocrisy and half-hearted support for MMR has led to nothing but confusion and heartache among parents.
Richard Nelsson, researcher

'It is wrong for Blair to stay silent about Leo'

I have written enough stories on dodgy vaccines to understand the issues and I am pretty sceptical of the scientific community (funded by drug companies, etc).

It is the measles part of the vaccine jab that might be the risky part if the child has some genetic predisposition. But I believe the risks were so small that my children would be better off being vaccinated.

We would probably opt for the single vaccine if available, or indeed do without the measles jab altogether.

It is entirely inappropriate for Blair to stay silent about Leo. This is not about privacy but about policy and leadership. I blame Mandelson...
Antony Barnett, reporter

'Cost is clearly a factor in the debate'

We opted for the single measles vaccine because I had concerns about my family medical history.

There was never a question that we wouldn't have our daughter protected against measles - only the certainty that we did not want to blast her body with a cocktail of antibodies.

Finally, we objected to being denied a choice on cost grounds. A Minister said that parents who want the 'safest, most cost-effective' protection for their children should opt for MMR - admitting that cost is a prime factor.
Sarah Ryle, reporter

'We should worry about a measles epidemic'

All my children have had the MMR vaccine. I feel very strongly in favour of going ahead with it. I think it is frightening how hesitant the scare has made parents. And it is a scare - not a scientifically proven case.

I have spoken to some of the people involved in the (incredibly expensive and extensive) research into the subject. The risk of a measles epidemic is what we should be worrying about.
Kate Kellaway,arts writer

'Nanny state insists it knows best'

We have a two-year-old and, given the concerns, wanted at least to have a choice between MMR and the single measles jab. We were unhappy that none was available and that our clinic steadfastly refused to offer or advise us about alternatives, or even give us information about them, sticking loyally to the government mantra.

We ended up having the MMR, in order not to keep our child at risk, but somewhat reluctantly - and would definitely have gone for the single jab had we had the choice.

It made us angry: that parents have been given no choice, that the nanny state insists it knows best, and that even basic freedoms we should expect to enjoy seem to be compromised by politics.
Gavin O'Toole, sub-editor

'I wish our child hadn't had any vaccinations'

The only complete vaccination I have given my three-year-old daughter is tetanus and, after attending a lecture on MMR by the homeopath Trevor Gunn, I wish I had not.

He explained the importance to development of childhood diseases which, if suppressed, lead to chronic conditions such as asthma and bowel disease which, in turn, can lead to auto-immune and central nervous system diseases. Reactions to diseases such as measles depend on our susceptibility, not the virus, which exists in us all.
Kate Edgley, sub-editor

'The tabloids have been irresponsible'

I have no problems with MMR. I have three children. All have had MMRs and boosters. In no other country in the world is this a problem. Only this country, where tabloids have boosted this story to quite outrageous, irresponsible levels, do we have a problem. You will always have rogue scientists saying bizarre things. The issue is what science in total says. And it says MMR is safe.
Robin McKie, science writer

'I'd have preferred the single jab if available'

I had both of my kids MMRed because at the time (four years ago) I wasn't aware of any controversy.

However, my sister-in-law (a therapist working with autistic children) said she was amazed, given the putative link between MMR and autism. She told me that it's difficult to establish the link, because the jab is given at the age that autism becomes apparent in children anyway. Knowing what I know now, I would much rather take the single vaccination if it were available.
Catriona Dry, manager

'A German mate called it British scaremongering'

My husband, who is German, rang one of his mates in Germany who is a paediatrician. She hadn't even heard of the risks of the MMR jab and thought it was British scaremongering.
Jeannette Hyde, travel editor

'MMR may have made our son's autism worse'

My younger son, David, was born autistic. His condition may have been worsened by the MMR jab, but there's no doubt that, unlike some of the children I know with autism, he has had his problems since birth.

We had both our sons vaccinated with the triple jab. David has not had his booster jab, despite pressure from his GP - he is obviously immune to measles, mumps and rubella now (a booster can't make him more immune).

The vaccine issue has become a lightning rod for public anxiety about autism, and is a distraction. Autism in many parts of the country has become so widespread as to be visible on every street. The nine-year-old across the road from us has autism; so does the lad in the street behind; so does the older boy in the house on the corner. I know one family where three boys are autistic. None of the parents is pointing to vaccine damage.

The MMR vaccine may be triggering autism in some children, and it's right that this should be fully investigated. But that's only one warning light in the whole autistic spectrum.
Chris Stevens, sub-editor

'Blanket immunisation is a nice (huge) earner'

My husband did some research and found the statistical likelihood of complications following mumps was much lower than the chance of a bad reaction to MMR.

At the time we attended a very right-on GP practice in east London and they were sympathetic to my plea for a measles-only jab, which they managed to obtain.

Blanket immunisation is a nice (huge) earner for the drug companies, but it is unnecessary for minor diseases.
Liz Boulter, sub-editor

'Measles is a killer, autism is not'

My son - like both of our children - had the MMR jab. He began displaying behaviour associated with an autistic spectrum disorder at around the age of three. We are lucky. He is at the low end of the autistic spectrum.

I don't regret him having the jabs. I have not been convinced of a link between the MMR jab and autism. I have found a lot of the recent reporting alarmist, unscientific and irresponsible. What it boils down to is this: measles is a killer.

Autism, for all the problems that it presents, is not. It just means your child is different.
Peter Beaumont, editor and writer