To have not taken DD to A&E?

[fadingfast]

We've just returned from a week of camping at a small local campsite.

There were lots of children there, and my ds and dd spent many happy hours exploring and playing with them. So far so good, and we actually had a lovely time apart from some truly shocking weather.

One evening, dd (7) found a plastic syphon tube in the woods at the edge of the site and was dared by some other children to drink what turned out to be residual diesel from the tube. She said she spat it out straight away but a small amount went down her throat. She rinsed out her mouth lots of times and we gave her plenty of water to drink. We were in a bit of a panic about what to do, but once we'd all calmed down we thought it would be best to keep a close eye on her and see how she was over the next 1-2 hours.

I kept asking her if she had a sore throat or tummy or felt ill at all, but she seemed absolutely fine (apart from obviously being upset about the whole incident). She slept well and was fine the next day.

Several parents have since said that they would have taken their child straight to A&E if it had happened to them. It's starting to make me think we were negligent parents for not rushing her to hospital.

What would you have done in this situation? We were approx 40 miles from the nearest A&E.

OP by giving your child the opportunity to roam free, to make her own choices and to risk assess for herself, you are giving her the very best start in life. Yes, her choice on this occasion was not sensible, but no damage done. She has learned a valuable lesson that she will be able to apply later on, when she needs to start making important decisions for herself - should I accept that pill/spliff, should I get into that taxi with the bloke I've just met - etc etc. We are breeding a generation of children who are incapable of making big decisions about their own lives because they have been cosseted and pampered - parenting at its worst. "Up your game"? No, its the "rush my precious little flower to A&E every 5 minutes" parenting style that needs a reality check.

Your child has probably learned massively more about avoiding peer pressure and assessing risks than they ever would have done if you hadn't let her "roam free".

We camp regularly on a site that is 45 mins from the nearest A&E and has no phone signal. In those circumstances, with a child who could tell me how she felt, I'd have done exactly the same. I might possibly knocked on the farmers door and asked if we could consult Dr Internet.

My sister once drank a whole glass of white spirits twat I phoned NHS direct (as it was then) and they advised to drink lots of water and wait for the arse explosion. She was fine didn't do her IBS much good

I do need to add she was in her 30's at the time

Even with a non verbal child it would be a watching game. I have a DS who is very prone to banging his head with some spectacular lumps resulting, we've only done A&E twice when he needed stitches. If I took him to A&E what could they do? If he's entitely symptomless they would send him home. I agree about parents needing to educate themselves more - our NHS can't cope with this constant panic about minor things that our parents would have known how to handle.

YANBU . People need to start taking responsibility for their own/DCs health and not try and palm off every minor issue to a&e. You did the right thing and monitored your child who you know best.

I'd have done exactly what you did OP - starting with the allowing them to roam and ending with the bollocking. Siphoning fuel by mouth is common (if not good) practise across the world. It tastes foul and I doubt she'd have swallowed more than a drop. Which is not particularly dangerous - it's diesel not neurotoxin.

I would have done exactly what you did.

"My son ate my contact lenses."

Kids eat strange things, eh? That must have tasted really odd.

Sorry, another pfb here who would have gone to A&E. People might see it as a 'waste' of NHS time but if anyone deserves to be wasting time then it's children, surely?

Even where children are concerned, wasting A&E's time because parents neither want to educate themselves or call 111 is irresponsible. OP's child had no symptoms at all and had only done what many thousands of people have done siphoning fuel. 111 is there specifically to help people without specific medical knowledge make an informed decision rather than default to A&E out of fear.

But using common sense is not to be knocked surely? If someone wasn't sure if their child suffered any adverse effects then of course take them but if someone is happy their child is well there's no need at all to 'waste time'

But the choice here wasn't to either take to A&E or to do nothing but observe. The amount of people saying they'd take a symptomless child to A&E over a few drops of diesel is worrying. If you are unsure, call 111!!!

No I wouldn't take to A&E. I've siphoned diesel loads of times as has DP. Tastes grim and do it to often and you can burn your mouth.

The "Take them to A&E hun just to check that's why they are there hope bubs is ok" lot do my head in. They are NOT there just to check, they are for Accidents/Emergencies, serious ones, not "just to check" for anything. Usually spouted by the same people who take the whole family with them and the kid is running around fine playing with the grotty Lego.

HCPs always say they'd rather see a hundred false alarms in children than not see the one who's actually ill, but that doesn't justify dashing off to hospital for every tiny bump.

Pp's comment about Facebook is very pertinent - there's an adrenaline rush when your child is ill or injured which is prolonged while action is still being taken (A&E, OOH, etc but also every notification on a dramatic FB status) and some of the drama queens described upthread may unwittingly be feeding their own addiction.

When my anxiety was bad my judgement of this kind of thing was poor. I did occasionally ring 111/NHS Direct to say "this is the situation and I can't judge how serious it is". Sometimes they'd advise wait-and-see, once we had an emergency dash to an open pharmacy (they have those details in front of them when you call btw) and once Minor Injuries to confirm a broken toe.

there is a big campaign at the moment about 'working upwards' (or whatever they call it) with medical advice. 111 is there for exactly this situation.

A and E is for life-threatening stuff. you would KNOW if she had drunk anything life-threatening, even if you hadn't been sure it was diesel.

lesson (age appropriate) is not to do stupid things like this and not to be a sheep. You can never start too early with 'peer pressure is for fools'.

You clearly did the right thing as DD is fine. Don't beat yourself up. You weighed up the risks (none swallowed) no vomiting or breathing problems, established it was diesel and acted accordingly.

It's always worth calling 111 as they should be able to access the national poisons information service and give the correct advice. Petrol for instance, is far more dangerous.

I am also with you OP, kept her under observation and kept asking how she was! I would also have been worried and blamed myself just like you and the comments about roaming free on a campsite? WTF, accidents can and will happen everywhere, you do know that most accidents occur in the home?

Btw. Never ever make anyone vomit. This can cause the Dreiser or petrol to be inhaled into the lungs where is can cause serious breathing problems.

NBU.

When i was little we had a power cut after we'd gone to bed and my mum got the parrifan lamp out. For some reason the fuel she used was pink (we grew up in a farming community which I suspect had something to do with it!)

Next morning I came downstairs and the first thing I saw was whaat I thought was a bottle of pink lemonade on the table - a VERY rare treat. I poured myself a glass and took a big swig....

the rest is history. I dontt think I've ever spat anything out so fast or with such force.

I was fine and no one mentioneed A&E. I got sent to my room instead for taking drinks without permisson!

I would have done the same op.
We had to take our dd to A&E on Monday night with suspected appendicitis, a young couple came as the man had an insect bite

I would have done the same as the OP if I was sure of what it was they had drunk, for example if it was DHs diesal tube which he'd just put down.

Not so sure I would have been so relaxed if my child found a tube in the woods with some liquid in it and drunk it... That would make me feel nervous.

I am not someone who goes to A&E. 8 year old has been twice and only because we were referred by GP, 5 year old has been once when he had suspected internal injuries. However, I would never object to someone taking a child to A&E with potential poisoning if they were worried- it should be encouraged, not ridiculed.

Thanks for all the (generally) reassuring comments, and especially for sharing all the hilarious deeply concerning stories of similar misadventures.

When I said to DH that the incident was still playing on my mind, he looked at me as if I was insane. 'But she's FINE!' he said. And she is completely fine, hopefully it's a lesson learned.

With hindsight, and (heaven forbid) should it happen again, I would definitely call NHS Direct, just for peace of mind. I do think in the circumstances, rushing off to A&E when there were no signs at all of any harm, is an overreaction.

To the pp who thinks a 7 year old should not be allowed to roam a campsite unsupervised, I think that is utter madness. I appreciate you don't know the exact context, but in my view (syphon pipe aside), it was exactly the sort of environment you can and should allow some independence (and what's the bloody point of going through the effort and discomfort of camping otherwise?!). How else can we expect children to gain confidence and be capable of, for example, getting themselves safely to and from high school at the age of 11?

Anyway, I hope the experience has at least been a lesson in not allowing herself to be led to do something dangerous.

A 7 year old not being allowed to roam while camping? Ridiculous. No wonder we are producing a generation of kids who have no idea how to evaluate risk - having never been allowed to take any.

It isn't just kids. It is a generation of young adults who have no idea how to risk assess - hence the tendency to rush off to A&E 'just in case'.

I honestly think this is the kind of situation that divides people 50/50. Being 100% risk-averse when it came to my children, I would definitely have sought medical advice rather than pursuing the OP's "wait and see" policy - however I know lots of people whose judgement I respect who would have done the same as the OP.

In the end, her decision was justified by her daughter being completely ok.