What's in a name? Well, quite a lot, actually, reckons Elspeth "Crumpet" McLean, who's been called a few in her time.
We have no way of knowing if parents of 9-year-old Talula Does the Hula From Hawaii had read mother-of-six Lauris Edmond's poem The Names, part of which says "to name a child is brave, or foolhardy, even now it shakes me".
Did they imagine such a name would be among those which would "sing softly like voices over the water" or "sound in the dreams" of their children's children?
Those of us with unusual names can sympathise with TDTHFH whose name is, apparently, to be changed by court order because it could be a social hurdle.
I am now keen to blame my name for anything which may have gone wrong in my life, including my social ineptness, my failure to be in a job with a six-figure salary, paranoia, lack of self esteem, being hopeless at sport, a never-good-enough parent . . .
The name Elspeth, the Scottish form of Elizabeth, was bad enough, but combined with Badcock it left me with one name nobody could spell or pronounce and another no-one wanted to believe, so it was often misspelt and mispronounced too.
Taking a name which has a variety of spellings when I married did not necessarily improve things.
There were other Elspeth McLeans out there with whom I was occasionally confused, although notably never with my husband's cousin, an effortlessly elegant lovely woman.
Other names I had been called and preferred to forget came to mind last week when news that the MeNZB vaccine, developed to combat the epidemic of a particular strain of meningococcal disease in New Zealand, was found to have provided protection from the disease which was months rather than years, as parents had thought.
The vaccine appears to have been particularly short-lived in those considered the most vulnerable to the disease, the under 5-year-olds.
In 2005, during the school MeNZB vaccination campaign, I wrote an opinion piece, not questioning the safety of the vaccine, as some were doing, but expressing unease about the way the Ministry of Health was using information, including lumping together all deaths from all strains of meningitis in its material for parents.
I was labelled a public danger, a conspiracy theorist and part of the anti-vaccination lobby.
Some academics accused me of quibbling or manipulating the truth.
I was even taken to task for pointing out that, although it was widely recognised officially that household overcrowding was a major risk factor for the disease, the brochure to parents did not include that under risks.
My point was that if parents are being asked to make decisions on matters such as vaccination, they must be provided with information which is straightforward, comprehensive and not exaggerated.
I remain unconvinced this was done in the MeNZB campaign.
The almost hysterical atmosphere around the $200 million campaign was such that anybody who dared question anything about it was virtually dismissed as a heartless wannabe child-killer and maimer.
Auckland University professor and paediatrician Diana Lennon, who led the trials for the vaccine, said last week it might have been better if more information had been given to parents on the duration of the vaccine, but she did not consider it was a wilful withholding.
"It's more the excitement of the chase, trying to get it [the vaccine] out there, trying to get organised, perhaps not looking at the situation five years down the track, where the situation is much more complicated.
People in public health campaigns tend to want simple messages; it's complex."
Not all parents will support any programme, no matter how wonderful it is, and it is understandable health professionals find that exasperating.
What must be realised is that any whiff of a "we know best, trust us" simplistic approach runs the risk of alienating any who may be wavering.
Who knows if the Ministry of Health has learned anything from this? The only information I could find about the duration of a vaccine to combat pneumococcal disease, which has been used widely overseas and which has been added to the infant schedule this year, was in the section of the Immunisation Advisory Centre (IMAC) site for health professionals.
It said duration was unknown.
When I asked the Ministry about this I was told: "When new vaccines are introduced, follow-up studies are required to determine when protection wanes.
We will continue to work with IMAC to ensure that appropriate and relevant information about vaccinations is available."
Fine, but why not say that to parents beside the information which already sensibly reminds us no vaccine is 100% effective?Perhaps these comments will provoke new names for me.
I am no longer bothered, since last week my nomenclature problems took a positive turn when nameless academic(s)-in-waiting at student magazine Critic dubbed me "the drinking man's crumpet".
I am considering changing my name to Crumpet McLean, but, being a responsible parent, I worry about the damage to the offspring.
Elspeth McLean is a Dunedin writer.
