School did not ask for permission to give child injection

[puddingsforsandy]

Child is 14 years. He has a plaster on his arm. He casually says he had an injection at school. I told him I don't remember signing permission slip. He says "oh the teacher said we don't need parental consent for this".

I have checked the slip and it's for immunisation for:
Tetanus, Diphtheria, Polio and Men C.

I don't know how to feel. Would they not ask for permission from parents?

At 14yo the children consent for themselves.

Not at DSs school as I have just signed a form that asks for either consent or refusal. Only if the form is not returned at all is the child asked to consent themselves.

This seems to go on a lot now.

I find it interesting that a 14 year old can consent to this. But a 15 year old can be forcibly vaccinated with the MMR (see recent court case). Children it appears are allowed to consent to have a vaccination, but not to refuse one.

Yes I think those double stsndards are outrageous.

DD brought that form home last year (before she turned 14)
I signed it and she handed it in.
It got lost so the nurse rang me at work and asked for permission.
When DD came home, she had not had it. Apparently they HAD to have a signed form.
I had to take her to the GP's for it

Do you mean this court case saintlyjimjams ?

Because the issues there were not solely about competency to give medical consent (and no matter how bad the divorce, I still find it both shocking and that parents end up still fighting bitterly for years).

By secondary school a child is old enough to know something of their own medical history.

My dd is 11, y7. She knows that there were issues with one if her vax as a toddler and some of the details surrounding it. She knows what happened and she knows of the app
We had before her second vax. She also knows that we always want to discuss as a family any future vax but that ultimately we will want her vaccinated wherever possible.

Why would people not make sure their children, by 12/13/14, are aware of their medical history?

I'm stunned that children of 12 are allowed to accept or refuse jabs.

Ds is needle phobic, he'd just say no to everything.

Ds has his head in the clouds 3/4's of the day, his idea of competency is managing to decide what to have for breakfast ffs

I'd go ape shit if something happened like the OP is describing.

No I realise they weren't solely about consent Edith.

I just find it interesting that a system will force a 15 year old to undergo a vaccination against their wishes & will yet allow a 12 year old ( in the case of HPV) to consent wothout needing parental consent (have heard of a few cases of that). I realise the medical & legal systems are different so am perhaps using the word system when I mean 'state'

Would be interesting (& bloody awful) to see what happened in a case where a child had a severe reaction & parental consent had not been sought.

What would probably happen is that the severe reaction would be put down to 'coincidence', or a pre-existing condition, unrelated to the vaccine.

Unless you could produce absolutely scientifically verifiable 'proof', then any amount of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence would be overridden.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation- I think it is vanishingly unlikely that the vaccine clinic was just sprung on them on the day. Schools just don't work like that.

True Martona - but then how much effort should be put into getting parental response (consent or otherwise). Ime schools are obsessive about for eg consent for photographs.

I suppose the school just collects the forms though - the decision lies with the HCP's.

True MrsRuff - so legally they're safe anyway.

YABU and controlling. The law says that children under 16 can give their consent to treatment as long as they have the capacity to understand the implications. Besides, it's his body, it's for him to decide whether or not he would like to be protected, surely?

Are you angry because you genuinely believe that having the vaccination was not in your sons best interests or are you angry because in your eyes your parental authority has been usurped?

Controlling??? Don't be ridiculous.

Chwaraeteg the OP hasn't said she's angry at all. She's said it feels wrong. That could be because she thinks it's an underhand way for the NHS to gain consent, by, effecively, approaching vulnerable individuals (children are generally seen as vulnerable) away form the influence of their parents. It's less about parental authority being usurped and more about parental responsibility being bypassed.

I think if a 14 year old wants to be vaccinated against those potentially very nasty diseases, then their parents shouldn't have the authority to stop them. If he were allergic, then he should know (or perhaps schools should have records of these things), and if he isn't allergic, then his right to choose to be vaccinated trumps the right of the parent with no real medical reason to object in my eyes.

I feel like if there was a story which went "parents of 14 year old refused to let him have vaccination because of conspiracy theory (and yes, there are real parents like this out there), one year later he caught polio and will now confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life" then most of you would be bating for their blood, not saying how great it was that they had had the right to object.

Obviously, if the teen has had some sort of SN or are particularly immature then they are not Gillick competent and that is different, because they may not be aware of some sort of allergy.

so legally they're safe anyway.

Absolutely, saintly.

The medical profession/state doesn't have to give any guarantees that a vaccine is not going to damage an individual, but demands incontrovertible proof, before recognising that any damage has been done. Not easy for a layperson to provide.

To paraphrase the idiom - If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, at least consideration should be given to the possibility that it might actually be a duck. Doesn't seem to be the case with possible vaccine damage.

The law says that children under 16 can give their consent to treatment as long as they have the capacity to understand the implications

That rather assumes that the child has had the implications explained to them.

this is from the NHS website

Children under the age of 16 can consent to their own treatment if they're believed to have enough intelligence, competence and understanding to fully appreciate what's involved in their treatment. This is known as being Gillick competent.

Where I am 14 yr olds can consent to immunisations. It means people with stupid negligent parents who value their own right to be ignorant over their child’s right to reduce their risk of dying from a vaccine preventable disease can do the responsible thing themselves.

I'm suspecting the teen was given the notification form (many times?!) but didn't deliver it to OP (parent).

Zombie thread

Zombie thread or not, child is gillick,competent

A consent form or digital form is sent home.
If it is not returned the child is assessed by the nurse for Gillick competence. If the child wants the vaccinations and understands what the vaccine is, the risks of not having them and possible side effects they can sign for themselves.
You need to ask your child why you didn’t receive a consent form.

We had an email with a link to a consent form last year. The jabs then didn't happen because of lockdown. They did them last week, but there was no further parental communication. Is it possible you filled in the form last year but have forgotten all about it?

This thread is 6 years old.

The "child" is now 20 and long out of school so it's a moot point anyway.