To be so cross and upset that I'm going to see the doctor tomorrow

[ScrotesOnFire]

And try and get an item removed from my medical records?

I can't go into any detail for fear of outing myself, but I saw my midwife today and she brought up an item on my records.

From many MONTHS ago which means that she must have been nosy and been rifling through my medical history in order to come across it

I was not aware that this information had been shared, I would not have given consent for it, it has no relevance to my health, was dealt with long ago and can only possibly be used to cause me distress, not improve my care in any way, shape or form.

I am absolutely furious that she has been rifled through my history like this, who else is this information open to?!?!
Any midwife, nurse, doctor, receptionist etc could read about it.

I haven't been able to relax all day about it, I am so upset and distressed.

I feel like not seeing my midwife ever again. Or the doctors.

Feel violated actually.

CallWaiting, sorry but I disagree with distress, sadness etc being conflated with mental health issues as they are not the same thing. I do have the right to express that opinion, sorry if my phrasing was a little brusque but to me it sounds like the OP although obviously upset is also being quite unfair and bringing mental health into it isn't always appropriate. Her midwife is doing her job and being accused of causing mental health problems.

I also had a similar experience. Only my 'unrelated incident' from years before was brought up by the midwife while I was in labour. I then had to answer a bunch of questions that were not health related. This was my 3rd child, and I've had another since then without the same questions. It does seem to be that you get a nosey midwife who, for whatever reason, decides to do some digging. I did not appreciate the timing of the interrogation, it could have waited until I had given birth instead of me trying to explain things that had nothing to do with them in between contractions!

Although it was put very bluntly, I have to say I think I do agree with honey, upset and anxiety are generally a part of life that we all go trough and you can't self diagnose because you're upset or annoyed.
Clearly your emotions are everywhere OP, but she was doing her job and trying to look out for you and baby, and if it is nothing to do with your physical health and could affect your mental health but isn't actually to do with your mental health, you sound fairly ashamed and more annoyed that a midwife knows I agree with a PP that it sounds termination related. And if it is please try to remember that she isn't bringing it up to be a bitch but to make sure you're ready and prepared for this emotionally! X

Havent RTFT. My medical record (and ds) still has reference to us being at risk of violence from the one time i had to call the police on exDP. It was 4 years ago now and i left him, set up in a new town and hes completely out of our lives now (no contact in nearly a year, yay!) but its still there. I've been discharged from all support services, CSF never got beyond calling me a couple of times etc. But im still glad its there. We're not 'at risk' currently, but whats not to say my ex will rock up at ds's school one day and whisk him off, just like he threatened the day i involved the police? This way, our gp, ds school and anyone else who needs to know there may be a future issue can be aware. I woukd expect a MW to bring it up if i had another baby because she'd be doing her job making sure the new baby would be safe from my ex, who is still entitled to contact even if the fucker don't deserve it.

Generally speaking, things only go on records if they're really important. And they shouldnt be visible to just anyone either. A receptionist will likely only see a very truncated version of your record on a computer system, and has no reason to go through your paper notes if not tasked for something (thats a sackable offence). On the other hand, a midwife needs to know anything that may compromise the safety as well as the health of you or your baby.

OP if you move surgeries it will remain on your records, how you deal with this is the key. If even mentioning the incident is causing you this much distress then you are in a good position to ask for some counselling or CBT, in pregnancy you should get quick access to this.

I am sorry but your reaction to this information on your file just reinforces that it should be there.

FWIW I was attacked and suffered a head injury, I suffered depression (as is common after a brain injury I later found out) and shortly after this in the troes of depression and maybe ptsd I attempted suicide, this was 9 years ago but a few times I have cringed when the doctor or nurse in practise scrolls back a few screens and it is there. I don't want this removed, it happened, I have dealt with this and can even talk about it now without distress.

During my booking in appointment, my midwife brought up something from when I was 13. I didn't think it was relevant and had forgotten I even ever had the problem (I was 36 at the booking in appointment) but I turned out I needed to see a consultant anaesthetist to check I would be ok for an epidural. It was a good job that the midwife went through my whole medical history thoroughly as I ended up asking for an epidural and if they had refused on the day as I hadn't had this check I don't know how I would have coped.

OP, I'm a bit worried that you think the only possible purpose this information about you can have is to cause you distress. HCPs aren't there to gloat, or have a nose through personal things for something to do, or to try to make you feel bad. They're professionals, and not only have they probably seen it all before and then some, but they're also not in the business of using your information against you. Your MW doesn't have the motive of causing you distress - it's more that this incident/information is distressing to you, and YOU don't want to think about it.
Trust me, the nurses and MWs and GPs at your surgery aren't reading aloud from patients' notes in the staffroom and having a laugh, they really aren't. What concerns me is how distressed just the mention of this incident/information has made you. You may not feel it's relevant, but what IS relevant is the stress and upset you're feeling right now.

If it were me, I'd be inclined to let the "MW mentioning this" bit of the issue go - she's just being thorough and trying to do her job well. The main bit is why you feel SO STRONGLY that no-one must know about this thing, ever, why it still makes you so upset. You poor thing, it must feel like something you thought was behind you has just jumped out at you from a cupboard. Sending unmumsetty hugs.

Your record is your record. You have only seen one and it is deeply personal to you but medical professionals have seen hundreds if not thousands.

I would say it is a rare woman's record that by the end of her life does not contain at least one of mental health, miscarriage, fertily probs, termination or some sort of abuse from a partner, often a combination, mixed up in with other health problems.

I don't bat an eyelid about it about it if it's not relevant to what I'm doing. It a normal health record.

I can understand you being shocked if the midwife raised something that you were not expecting, but your reaction seems completely over the top. Agree with PP that being so defensive over the issue (whatever it may be) is likely to raise more flags. Would you stop your children using the NHS as well?

OP

I could be totally off the mark but I actually get the impression that this is something your partner doesn't know about.

For what it's worth no one apart from you or medical professionals should be rifling through your notes- which are an extension of your medical records

Your partner won't be interested in looking through them so just keep them tucked away somewhere and he won't see

^who else is this information open to?!?!
Any midwife, nurse, doctor, receptionist etc^

any health professional or receptionist/admin at your GP practice has access to your notes. breaching confidentiality is a sackable offence.

I hope you're feeling ok today OP, and that the appt was positive.

bluecarpet notes are about the patient and kept in relation to a mutually negotiated and agreed service for which the patient pays, albeit indirectly. The notes should be mutually owned and there should not be a charge rendered to the patient to see their own notes. Copying in the digital age should not be required. I quite agree no hcp should be requested to change facts for fraudulent purposes but they should be required to change inaccuracies. My hv wrote on my son's records that she had referred me to the chief immunologist because of his breathing difficulties and my concerns over immunisation. He didn't have any breathing difficulties bit I did have questions about possible links with a battery of early jabs and allergies which she was unable to answer "I can only tell you what's in the leaflet". I don't see why the patient should have to pay to monitor that level of inaccuracy and misrecording and I my experience it is not infrequent.

for which the patient pays, albeit indirectly.

I think the calculation is that you have to earn around £35k to be a net contributor to taxes, so the vast majority of my patients pay nothing for their NHS service. Budgets are being slashed and providing ongoing access to notes and the admin time to deal with the fallout from it is not high on our priority list when we can't recruit GPs or nurses and services like mental health are in complete crisis.

they should be required to change inaccuracies.

reasonable point - if something is actually inaccurate then it could be changed, but would have to be clearly marked that a change is made. In 12 years as a GP and countless requests to change things on notes, not one has been factually inaccurate but of course I accept that it can happen

Do you think bluecarpet that as many doctors think their patients are getting a free, that is why many patients are not treated as though they are in an equal partnership with their doctor. DH and I, on your basis, must be subsidising about 20 adults. I would like it if all GPs and other HCPs afforded patients a little more respect - I didn't like the reference to the op being a nut - I especially don't like that level of disrespect being aimed at another human being who I may be contributing for.

My medical records should be a jointly owned record - I do not receive free healthcare and I do not expect anyone to infer that I should ne grateful for anything that is substandard. My families contribution is huge but yes I do get the impression when I visit the doctor that I am just regarded as a member of the great unwashed who is in some way subordinate to the doctor. I'm not, the op isn't and neither is any other member of the human race.

The state gives me nothing I haven't paid for bluecarpet often it doesn't give me what I have paid for. Therefore I reserve the right to call the tune to an extent. I do hope you have more respect for your patients than your are conveying on here.

I fully respect my patients but the NHS has been starved of funds for at least the last 8 years. I don't think people really understand that we are on a cliff edge and rapidly tumbling off. The NHS is in meltdown.

There is no money for anything (well, plenty of money for ridiculously expensive PFIs and management consultants, but nothing at the clinical coal face)

people who retire or leave aren't being replaced

services in the community are being slashed as some practices I know are having their funding cut by 20-25% next year

there are no doctors as they are all leaving in droves to Australia (and I'd be joining them if I didn't have family ties here).

we have no time even to attend to people's direct clinical needs, so unfortunately niceties like helping people look through their notes, understand them and make corrections are nowhere near our agenda, nice though it would be

we would all love to offer a better service, but until Jeremy *unt and his cronies decide differently it ain't going to happen.

But the extraordinary thing is that the service is better now than it was 20 years ago in many respects. Not MH admittedly but I get a better GP service than I used to and recently waited only three weeks for a neurologist consultant review, hospitals are cleaner and more modern. 20 years ago doctors and maternity services were complaining bitterly about services being underfunded and on a knife edge. It's hard as a patient to take on board whether it really is crumbling or not because clearly things weren't as bad as they were presented 20 years ago.

In my dealings with CAMHS recently there was a resonant howl about being unable to meet demand but it was also the most badly organised service I have ever encountered. It wasn't available at the times that met the needs of patients because it was only 9-5, yet at 9.30 staff were dribbling into work. Whilst there is a funding issue for this service , I would expect it to be more effective managed before I gave it more money.

On the one hand I feel for the NHS, on the other I don't think it can carry on in the way it was set up because medicine has moved too far since then.

"I do hope you have more respect for your patients than your are conveying on here"
^
Puzzled how you ' ve come to that conclusion about bluecarpet's posts; he/she doesn't agree with your POV but no disrespectful attitude is being displayed.

How can a mental health problem, that you needed professional help for, not be medical?

BeauGlacons
Have you considered that you may have been labelled as "that sort of patient" hence your better GP service?

@bluecarpet

"I think the calculation is that you have to earn around £35k to be a net contributor to taxes, so the vast majority of my patients pay nothing for their NHS service."

I object to that. I may not be a net contributor but I do pay tax and NI therefore I am not getting a service for free. From each according to their means and all that.

I do agree the funding situation is not good. I work for a mental health charity so I certainly know about mh services in my area and the work being done to try and improve them in a 'cost neutral' (hate that term) way as well as the huge cuts to voluntary sector funding and the pressure to do more for less.

Herecone - because a problem that impacts your mental health, eg grief over bereavement is not necessarily a mental health problem in medical terms, I.e. pathological. Because a medical solution such as anti depressants may not be as helpful as targeted therapy from therapists specialising in the area that is causing the person distress, Because many if not the majority of gps, let alone midwives have less training in mental health issues than someone with a diploma in counselling and therefore may not be best placed in signposting people to the most appropriate care. I'm not saying hcps don't care about their patients mental health. Or that some of them don't provide brilliant care for people with mental health issues. But my experience when what I now realise was PND but faced with a health visitor with a clipboard and a questionnaire made me realise that she just wasn't equipped to pick up any mental health issues (I said what she wanted to hear) or deal with them if she had.

pinkginandolives

You've said than not everyone in healthcare (GPs or health visitors) may not be best equipped or trained to deal with mental issues or that the issues !at not have a "medical term" or that the particular problems require a different approach than drugs.

Im not talking about disorders but something that affects your mental health not be classed as medical. I think that separating the two has led in part to "snap yourself out depression" attitudes.

The only possibility I can think of where the OP may feel like this could be ifmshe was a gambling addict or similar although it would point to her health and should be on her notes. From hints the OP has given though, I don't think it's that.

I don't think the OP is thinking clearly. I think her judgement's been clouded by her emotional response to whatever it is she's talkijg about here. Saying that she'd only tell them non-confidential information is underestimating and missing the point of patient-Dr confidentiality. I think a health visitor clearly has a legitimate reason to go back through the patients history and familiarise themselves with their patient.

I hope the practice manager is able to make the OP see this.

herecomethepotatoes the one group of health professionals I really don't believe should be allowed to look through notes ate health visitors. They cannot make independent decisions about clinical matters and have to refer to a gp to make that clinical decision. They cannot refer to a consultant, they cannot confirm an illness or condition, they cannot prescribe. The information in the records is therefore meaningless to them.

That is apart from the fact that although health visitors are obliged to offer their services to all women, no woman is statutorily obliged to accept their services. Their role is to advise families with under fives on child health and developmental matters. Once has o ly to read thread after thread on here to see how badly they tend to do it. If the NHS is dying due to resources there is a massive saving to be made here or at least the money could be spent on better quality, better qualified clinical professionals who don't waste their own and others people's time with invasive visits where they answer any question beyond the most basic with "I don't know, I'm not an expert (if they aren't experts, they shouldn't be offering misguiding opinions or dictating the mantra") or you'd have to ask the doctor.

BeauGlacons

You seem to have a real issue with health visitors and have gone quite off topic as regards the OP's problem. How about nurses? Some of them are pretty shit and can't do what an anesthesiologist can.

Not all nurses can prescribe medicines. None of them can prescribe all the medicines a Dr can (diamorphine, for example). None of them can refer you to a consultant.

They cannot make independent decisions about clinical matters and have to refer to a gp to make that clinical decision

In a similar vein, surgeons make decisions as to how / if to operate, not the Dr who sent them.

The information in the records is therefore meaningless to them - so a history of depression on the medical notes wouldn't make the health visitor look a little more closely for PND, for example?

no woman is statutorily obliged to accept their services

The same can be said of all (ignoring very extreme cases involving courts) Drs, surgeons etc.

better qualified clinical professionals who don't waste their own and others people's time with invasive visits where they answer any question beyond the most basic with "I don't know, I'm not an expert

Better qualified professionals cost more. They don't need the knowledge a Dr does but in many cases can either say, "relax, it's normal" or "yes, make an appointment". This happens all the way up the chain. Last week I saw a receptionist who sent me to see a general Dr who then sent me for an x-ray who sent me and the images to an orthopaedic Dr/surgeon specialising in hands. As an issue extends beyond one person's expertise, they push you up or along the chain.

How can the visits be invasive when you can say "no thank you"?

I'm sure there are terrible health visitors and there are excellent ones, just as any role in any profession.

I think suggesting that in general, the medical notes are meaningless is ridiculous.