The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), a resource for mental health clinicians and researchers, first appeared in 1952, and was first revised in 1968. Both times autism was seen as childhood schizophrenia. In the 1980s, the diagnostic criteria for autism were expanded, resulting in an increase in diagnoses. In 2013, the 5th revision of DSM combined autism, Asperger’s, and childhood disintegrative disorder into autism spectrum disorder. In 2019, The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that about 1 in every 110 children has been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder. In 2020, The CDC said 1 in 54 children had been identified with an autism spectrum disorder.
In 1963, the measles vaccine was developed, and by the late 1960s, vaccines were also available to protect against mumps (1967) and rubella (1969). These three vaccines were combined into the MMR vaccine in 1971. Twenty-seven years later, Andrew Wakefield, a British physician, claimed that the MMR vaccine caused autism.
Wakefield began his career as a British physician in 1981 when he received his medical degree from St Mary’s Hospital Medical School. In 1998, Wakefield and 12 colleagues published data in the Lancet that suggested the MMR vaccine may cause kids to develop autism. Despite Wakefield’s small sample (n=12)—reputable epidemiological studies involve sample sizes in the thousands—the lack of controls, and the spurious conclusions, the paper received wide publicity, and MMR vaccination rates began to drop. Almost immediately, however, the rules of scientific inquiry took charge. In response to Wakefield’s sloppy work, many researchers conducted better epidemiological studies and found—in study after study—no link between MMR vaccination and autism. Ten of Wakefield’s 12 colleagues also published a retraction of the interpretation of the original data, saying the data did not permit concluding a causal link between MMR vaccine and autism. The Lancet also found that Wakefield had failed to disclose he had been funded by lawyers who had been engaged by parents in lawsuits against vaccine-producing companies. The Lancet completely retracted Wakefield’s paper in 2010, admitting that several elements in the paper were incorrect. Wakefield and his colleagues were held guilty of ethical violations— they had conducted invasive investigations on the children without obtaining the necessary ethical clearances—and scientific misrepresentation—they did not report that their sample was selective, plus Wakefield altered numerous facts about the patients’ medical histories. Wakefield lost his medical license in 2010.
The Wakefield fraud is likely to go down as one of the most serious frauds in medical history. Here we are in 2025, and the belief that vaccinations are dangerous to children continues to grow, vaccinations rates continue to decline, and diseases like measles—25 years ago thought to be eradicated in the USA—are on the upswing. How are parents and guardians to cope?
The answer to that question is straightforward. After reading the material above, if you still believe vaccines are dangerous for your child, nothing we can say will change your mind. As one West Texas anti-vaccination mother told a reporter in February 2025, “We’re not going to harm our children or risk the potential to harm our children so that we can save yours.” If, on the other hand, you accept the reputable science of epidemiology—and if you understand that personal opinions are subject to ego defenses that distort reality and prevent critical thinking, but the scientific process is subject to objective rules—then you will be willing to protect your family’s health and follow the recommended vaccination regimen for all your family members. From a health standpoint, that’s good coping.
Psychology and Stress 