A and E database(226 Posts)
I thought they did this anyway? Don't they senda note to your health visitor?
Do you agree with it or do you think it will make people worry more? Whilst I can see the good in it, I worry that kids just won't get taken for help any more. Not sure what the solution is though.
I agree lady, but without the systems beyond the computer in place is this database going to achieve anything?
Yes: waste money.
I doubt very much that this will cost £9 million, ten times this maybe. I wonder how much it will cost to complete the old IT system? I recon this is what they are going to do.
Oh, 12.7 BILLION! They need to sit and work this out properly. If it can't be done with 12.7 billion, they are not going to manage it with 9 million.
The HV used to be a member of the family to new parents, somewhere for them to turn to when parenthood began to take it's toll. They simply don't have the time now, they are far too overstretched. Very few parents set out to abuse their children, it's the most stressful job in the world and stress is one of the key factors in abuse. Families need support so this 9 million (laughs) would be better spent increasing the support availiable (HV's and home start) as it will prevent abuse in the long run. Better to prevent then to spot in my opinion.
I'm not so sure about this. I can see the point, but it would also mean that details of every child who visits A and E are on a database and frankly I am not so convinced about the security of such databases.
Also, people who try to hide the fact that they have abused a child in their care will still try to hide it. Only with this new system they may feel that they can't hide it by simply going to a different hospital, or by lying about what has happened, and they may not take the child to a doctor at all!
Why does another database have to be deployed? It's like show a government an issue and its "yay lets use a computer to fix it!" "Oooh lets spend money on IT" like they are 12yr old boys let loose in Selfridges TV/computer department.
Every single problem gets a database. This means an IT firm is bidding for the contract. It means YOUR personal information is fed into it and accessed by who knows who for who knows what reasons. A database is administrated by people. People often make mistakes, data is entered wrongly. Data is left on USB sticks in taxis/trains etc.
I'm not suggesting conspiracies just pointing out that money, power and people are involved and whilst every thing can be innocent now, just imagine what could be possible?
I never really thought all the papers/media and Gov/police were in cahoots, but events suggested worrying items. How about Mitchell? All small showings of man made behaviour. The expenses enquiries, hillsborough. Man does nasty things. Why will a computer database remain innocent when man is running it? (By man yup I'm lumping women in here too)
LadyMary, the NHS IT project you linked to above was a different scheme. The one that has been scrapped and which CPIS replaces was ContactPoint.
As a parent, things like this freak me out. I am not and never will be a child abuser but I get extreme anxiety and paranoia about my children, fuelled by this kind of record-keeping and suspicion by professionals. I know I will be counting my children's medical appointments and fretting about them hurting themselves constantly when this comes in.
Plus, there are other things that could be much improved. As a childminder, I went to a 'safeguarding children' course. I expected to learn ways to effectively help children who I suspected were being abused or neglected. I didn't. Perhaps I was unlucky with my course, but it was mostly about how to legally protect myself from getting in trouble about this. There was very very little about how to protect a child in my care, and what there was was only about children who were in immediate danger.
Thank you, tribpot. Yet another computer system then!
I am also a childminder and it is our duty to report suspected abuse, there is a very strict procedure to follow, and all childminders/nurseries legally have to have a procedure in place and follow it if they suspect a child to be abused. That is for all forms of abuse (neglect, physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, bullying). I have clear procedures in place and communicate them clearly with the parents. If you are not sure what your role is as a childminder, you should talk to your local authorities right away and ask for more training. There was a childminder involved in the Baby P case and she did know the child was on social services register and did report her concerns.
When I registered to be a childminder about 80% of my interview by ofsted inspector was about child protection and safegard.
The MP who has been promoting it is the MP where i live. Not impressed with him for various reasons...........
My Dd, who was 5 months at the time, was in A&E twice over the course of 3 days. My HV knew as they were informed. I presummed this was standard procedure. Dd had Bronchiolitis.
my dd (7) has been to A and E 5 times. 3 times in one year! I thought that my doctor was informed anyway. thankfully 3 times she was sent through school related issues - as i was worried I would get a call from social services!!
Yes but ... imagine you're a doctor, working at A&E. There's a child in front of you with burns, probably from hot water. With new system, you can immediatly see that this child is already on the database because he has a social worker, and there has been let's say, 4 recent visits to A&E because of accidents, or fractures. The new system allows the doctor to have that knowledge, immediatly. With the old system, a doctor could not see that information there and then. The visit to a&e would be registered, followed up, the parents would receive a call or letter from HV, followed up by social services. But the doctor would not be able to have the information there and then and allow her/him to take immediate action by linking all the information together.
It is great that the government think abused children are rushed to A&E every day. But they aren't. That is the problem.
My main concern is that neglected injured children will no longer be taken to A & E and will be left to suffer tremendous pysical pain in isolation.Extreme thinking I know, but surely this will stop abusive parents seeking medical attention, please put my mind at rest that this will not be the case.
If you want to find a needle in a haystack, then making the haystack bigger only makes it harder. Abuse is difficult enough to spot without information from 15 million extra kids flooding the system. Better to invest in HVs and so on.
mumofthemonsters, that was my first thought too. While I think it's essential for agencies to communicate, broadcasting this on the news is just going to drive the sort of people who might harm their children intentionally, or through anger, to not take them for medical help when they're hurt.
Sorry not read all but as others have no doubt said: this will worry good parents with accident prone kids AND abusive bastards will avoid seeking medical help for children who really need it
Contact point was scrapped because it was over buerocratic and was not being implemented effectively by professionals. It never really got underway nationwide and so one county could not really connect with another. The problem lays with professional education with regard to multi agency information sharing. All the data bases in the world can be linked up but if professionals do not see the value in it it will not be used effectively. The problem is really about professionals not understanding what information is safe to share and what information is crucial to share and that is through not understanding data protection and a lack of safeguarding training.
I ment to also add inter professional training in degree programmes has also now been scrapped and that is because it is a fruitless task where social workers doctors salt etc spend two weeks building a board game and carrying out data analysis tasks and not true safeguarding training.
I have been reading this thread with interest. I have three children born from 1990 through to 2012. The key to tracking and safeguarding children at risk does not lie with this 'new' idea it begins the moment babies are born from the first midwife visit and HV visit then moving on to the baby clinic and beyond.
It is too late by the time they reach A&E. Since my first dd came along the level of involvement from various professionals has declined drastically. It is partially due to NHS cuts in health workers that more children go unnoticed and become harmed through neglect and abuse.
The amount of contact I had with my first dd is incredibly different to what I have experienced this year. 1990, I had to attend baby clinic weekly and if I didn't there were enough HV to visit and check to see if we were ok. My dd had many compulsory check ups throughout the year including 6 month, 8 month, 1 year then 18 months and 2 and 3 year checks.
With dd2 who came along in 2006 most of these check ups were stopped due to cuts and we thought it was a shame as you like to have the little red book with all the developmental bits and pieces in, I know I did. The flip side of this is vulnerable children are far far more likely to slip through the net of the professionals who are supposed to be watching out for them. It is not the fault of these hard working people and it is easy to see how concerns which are reported are left on the system and not linked because no one is actually regularly seeing any children vulnerable or not.
2012 I have been to the clinic once and never heard from anyone since. It was generally accepted as a third time mum I didn't really need to go, I was actually told this and now there are no milestone check ups as such in our area. We may book a 1 year check if we have any concerns. I really do not need to go to baby clinic and if I did I would but what about parents who are not coping and children and babies showing possible signs of abuse. Clinic and home visits were useful to maintain contact but these are non existent after your second or third baby.
No one wants people intruding on their home life, I hated all the visits shortly after having a baby but accepted it as important for my child. Now there is little or no involvement at all. Instead of spending so much money on this latest scheme surely it is better to put the money into preventative or early detection plans designed to flag up signs of neglect and abuse? This may be a deterrent for certain potential culprits and save children at risk. Children who are at risk could potentially be noticed sooner.
Even at school it is not compulsory to have your child weighed and for them to partake in the regular health checks. You can sign a form to confirm you do not want your child checked. If a child is being physically abused of course the parent is not going to allow them to be checked.
This is simply a pattern I as a parent have noticed over the years and it is all down to money and lack of staffing. There are definitely situations where mistakes can be made and as posters have mentioned abuse is suspected when in fact there are medical issues. So surely keeping track early on would prevent this also?
I personally have first hand experience of being on the other side and falling prey to ss assumptions. Although in my situation it was rectified fairly quickly and we received a heartfelt apology,it tends to linger all your life and I can completely understand apprehension regarding the latest plans.
Creating a support network from cradle through school is the answer. And better training to ensure parents who have no need to worry and feel able to voice concerns is important. There does however need to be a certain amount of compulsory check ups and developmental appointments in order to maintain contact with children, getting parents to be on board with this could of course be the challenge. You just want to get on with your life. But I for one think so many awful situations we have read about in the last few years could have been prevented through better communication and regular professional involvement.
I had my 1st born in 2006 and notice differences.
1st born has possibly 12days midwife daily.
hv 2possibly 3home visits then regular weighin at clinic
had more midwives appointments ith 1st
2nd /3r time round gets less and less.
I do still have same hv and ring her up and have good relationship with her.
had incident with nursery last year where they assumed things and came up with rang conclusion and felt awful immediatly rang hv who assured me ok and nursery did apologise but on back of my mind wonder if its on file and will go onto school.
My eldest missed the checks reception she was sick that day shes year 2 and never even met local school nurse.
shes been a&e once due to school related injury.
had no follow up from school nurse.
The 9month checks still exist but 2year checks scrapped,
now in our area they using healthcare assistants to make home visits to new mums and closing health centres so people have to travel miles to see a hv.
i remember my sister was accident prone genuine accidents in 90s and social came round to investigate and how awful my mum felt.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.