To think they shouldn't have made me take a pregnancy test.

[ItsNotPossible]

This is light hearted because I do understand rules are rules, but.......

I was in hospital today to have a minor operation. Beforehand I was asked if I could be pregnant. I replied no definitely not and the nurse ticked the form happy with my answer.
Twenty minutes later she returned to me with a pee pot and said I needed to take a test. Not really a problem, it's just a quick pee in a pot.

However:

I am 54 and haven't had a period for 3 years 4 months.

I November I completed 8 weeks of daily radiotherapy to my pelvic area which would have left me infertile.

I was in hospital to have an op to re-open the top of my vagina and entrance to my cervix as the radiotherapy had fused them together. I didn't have sex with my DP during the 8 weeks of chemo and radiotherapy because I was too ill. That finished in November, we still haven't been able to have sex since completion of treatment because I was fused

All of this they were aware of. How much blummin evidence of not being pregnant does one need.

The thing that disturbs me most from these stories is that the y are asking the question, gettting details of people's sex lives/personal stuff, then insisting they must test anyway . In which case why ask?

X posts with others.

Thank you TeaCupDrama. :)

yes if consent is refused completely refused eg for non emergency surgery, then yes the patient could sign the preop consent clearly indicating the refusal to have the test, that's true
however, it saves lives, prevents injuries, saves money, avoids harm - it's routine preoperatively at the very least. nobody will force treatment on anyone (unless they lack capacity for that decision) it is not in the same league as any infringement on autonomy/ bodily integrity etc as fr example, telling someone they must have an oophorectomy after a C-section, or telling someone they must have a biopsy, etc. it's just a very sensible screening test to prevent avoidable harm

it really annoys me even as an NHS professional when I know many of these things are in the patients best interests that various members of staff suggest to patients things are mandatory when they are optional

I have been on two medico-legal courses recently both emphasised that doing the above what OP complains about is professional misconduct
poor communication, mis-information, invalid consent or doing anything without asking for consent or worse doing something when consent has been refused all are misconduct that could put your registration with professional body at risk

This happens all the time in many fields with the police, JSA officials, local councils schools etc, saying you have to give certain information when actually you do not or you have to do certain things when you do not it is deceitful at best

Acatcalledcolin, with teenagers we would always try to get them to come in on their own to avoid asking about pregnancy in front of their parents.

". it's just a very sensible screening test to prevent avoidable harm"

So why don't they simply advise that it's routine and not demonstrate to the patient a lack of respect for what that patient says, by asking a question, the answer to which they have no intention of respecting?

The NHS is absolutely appalling at stuff like this. This is really, really basic stuff about respect for patients.

Very few women object to having a test done. It is quite a routine thing, I'm not sure why anyone would refuse but of course they are within their rights to do so and I would of course not refuse to treat them but would have a lengthy conversation about the risks of the test (none) and risks of not finding out about a pregnancy before the treatment (small but not zero).
In fact I can't remember ever having a patient who refused.

But, of interest I have had patients who:
Are 11 years old and pregnant
Have a 11 week old baby and 5 weeks pregnant
Have been sterilised and pregnant
Have had chemo and almost certainly infertile but are pregnant
are in their 50s and pregnant; they thought the amenorrhoea was the menopause.
Are in a gay relationship but pregnant
Etc etc!

cafecito I agree it is sensible screening however it is not OK to tell a patient that test is compulsory; that we must do it ( suggesting by implication the surgery is dependent on her consenting) or it is our policy, just procedure etc etc

also it is not according patient much dignity/respect to ask questions then basically say we can't take your word so we are testing anyway

it would have been much better to say to OP
" we generally test all women under 55/60 for pregnancy before surgery to eliminate even the smallest chance of a pregnancy so we would like a urine sample please"

rather than the
are you pregnant?
"no"
are you absolutely sure there is no chance
" yes no chance "
well we need to do the test anyway
makes the patient out to be a silly little women who knows nothing and can't be trusted

I am not disagreeing teacup- however the law at present still leans to the paternalistic - there is no complete doctrine of informed consent in the UK as there is in the US for example. and even informed consent is still constrained by choices you are given and information you are provided or have access to.
we have come leaps and bounds but the balance of beneficence, non maleficence and then respect for autonomy is very fine indeed. the law is still airy fairy ambiguous as to exactly how much information is required to be 'informed' and GMC guidance very patient specific and subjective
As for mandatory treatment, this never happens and nothing should be dressed up as such (re treatment) - in fact the position here is quite the opposite,you are allowed to make clinically terrible decisions in refusal of treatment that will ultimately result in your death or even the death of an unborn child.
I like weasel have met 50+ year olds pregnant and unaware, and I've met people adamant they are not and cannot be pregnant, about to have laparascopic surgery or even a laparotomy, who indeed are pregnant

I didn't have to do a test when I was in hospital only a few months ago. I was asked to sign a disclaimer saying I took full responsibility if I was pregnant. This seems like a much better way of avoiding the NHS being sued.

It worries me, cafecito, that it took more than one question about absolute refusal and an insistence on my part that there is no "absolute must" whatsoever, before you conceded that there is no obligation to be tested.

I know I'm labouring the point but I find it most disconcerting that the opposite was repeatedly insinuated despite argument to the contrary and, like Teacup I know that it doesn't just happen on here (or just in the NHS, come to that).

paxtecum I am being thick - what do you mean by your post:

They are checking because if you had been pregnant and the procedure had resulted in a miscarriage then you could sue.

The modern trend for sueing for compensation has resulted in a lot of time (and money) being spent by the NHS on preventative measures.

There is a team of photographers in each hospital assisting with this.

sorry x posts, yes it should be dealt with better I agree - but there's no way I'd be happy operating on someone who might be pregnant, no way.

I like your wording teacup. I agree current questioning does sound like the patient isn't being believed.

It would be negligent to unknowingly do surgery on someone who is pregnant. absolutely negligent. Equally it would be negligent not to check bhCG in a ruptured ectopic.

The other side of course is that if the protocol is for all women under 55 to have a pg test - if you have been in 6 times and only asked once - then they have broken their protocol approx 83% of the time they were treating you.

In which case - 1- why is this not Protocol not being followed on so many occasions? And 2- if they are not following this protocol then what other protocols are they also not following properly which could have more serious implications for you? This could be a red flag to other problems such as the attitude of staff to following protocols!

Nobody's arguing with you about that cafecito, I think probably everyone agrees with you. Of course it would be negligent to not check if someone is pregnant.

The question is, why does the NHS choose as its method of checking, to ask a question, the answer to which has been discounted as irrelevant before the question is asked and in doing so, reminding vulnerable, ill people that they shouldn't expect to be listened to? What sort of culture produces that sort of behaviour and what sort of environment does such behaviour create for patients?

I think it's a clumsy attempt at stepping away from paternalism into shared decisions, fully informing the patient etc. it's not handled well, unfortunately tone, competence at communicating and common sense are in rather uneven distribution

These are all really good points. I was asked about pregnancy before a chest scan and an MRI, but not before a hysteroscopy. Same hospital.

Not sure how the test works but could it be added on to the 'dip stick' that looks at numerous things from blood sugar to ... well I don't know. Maybe it already is.

That way it could be phrased as, "we are routinely testing your urine for a number of things, including pregnancy. We test everyone including men"

There have been a number of cases of women going in for hysterectomies who turned out to be pregnant and effectively had a termination as well as the hysterectomy. Some had no children and a history of infertility and many sued.

In light of this it seems very sensible to have a blanket, public policy of testing all women of childbearing age with this simple, non-invasive and zero risk test for pregnancy. Of course patients can refuse but why would they? Of course in some cases it will be virtually impossible that the woman could be pregnant but public policy doesn't work that way; it doesn't deal with exceptions, it deals with the norm. The cost is the minor inconvenience of peeing in a cup for women who cannot possibly be pregnant - think of it this way though: you might be saving another woman from unknowingly terminating a much wanted, but unknown pregnancy.

I didn't get tested.

shewhowhines I have NC but we've spoken before we have/ had the same cancer . This is the first time I've been tested throughout my treatment which began last September. There was no way 8 weeks of radiotherapy then 3 sessions of internal radiotherapy was ever going to leave me fertile. Add on my age, lack of menstrual cycle and inability to actuall have sex and only divine intervention was going to help me get pregnant.

I found it quite amusing but for others it could be very distressing.
I wonder how much money is being wasted doing needless testing.
Of course there have been cases where people have sued and much wanted pregnancies terminated. But in cases such as mine surely it would be easier and cheaper to ask the patient to sign a form waiving any rights to sue if him up there had decided now was the time to perform a miracle.

Baby DS needed an xray and I went to help hold him. I was asked if I might be pregnant - ds was ten days old!! The nurse was embarrassed at asking though!