Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

To think this optician is a pillock

47 replies

Rhynswynd · 08/02/2019 06:43

I took dd8 to see optician for general check up.
He tested her for colour blindness using the number pattern book. He said that she could be a carrier for colour blindness (My dad is colour blind) and I said oh can she? Ok. He replied with "I am telling you she is". I thought he was saying it was a possibility from his original phrasing.
He then went on to ask about whether I am short sighted I said "yes and so is dd1". He told me a myopic baby wasn't possible and I should get that looked at again.

AIBU to think he is talking out of his arse and to see a different optician next time?

OP posts:

BreastSideStory · 08/02/2019 07:10

How old is your baby? Most young babies are myopic until their eyesight develops

BreastSideStory · 08/02/2019 07:13

Oh sorry, I just saw she’s 1. Again most children of that age are myopic to some extent, kids don’t develop 20/20 vision until they’re of school age at least. Unless there’s severe myopia or a lazy eye it does seem odd to have been diagnosed so young. The average is usually about 5 for diagnosis

ApolloandDaphne · 08/02/2019 07:14

I am confused about what you are asking. Can you clarify? Are you saying he told you your DD is colour blind or that she could be carrying the gene for colour blindness? Are you saying you have a short sighted baby?

mum11970 · 08/02/2019 07:27

Are we talking about two children? Did you take the 8 year old for a check and when you mentioned that your 1 year old was myopic he said it wasn’t possible?

Original poster

Rhynswynd · 08/02/2019 07:33

I'm confused too.
He said dd8 was a gene carrier for colour blindness. Then made me sound like an idiot for saying that was interesting and following on that he told me she is colour blind to a degree. Not what he said originally but cool, whatever.
But then he started on about my baby dd1 who he said it was impossible for her to be myopic as that just does not happen in infants and they are normally long sighted. I have a diagnosis from a specialist but sure dude.

OP posts:

Original poster

Rhynswynd · 08/02/2019 07:34

The 1 year old has Phelan-McDermid syndrome so has had a lot of tests done. Eye tests, MRI, heart scans etc

OP posts:

Mari50 · 08/02/2019 07:35

BreastSideStory you don’t know what you’re talking about

ChesterGreySideboard · 08/02/2019 07:39

He would have no way of knowing if she carried the gene for colour blindness. And so what if she does.

As for the 1 year old, well most children that age are long sighted if they have vision problems at all, being short sighted at that age would be very unlikely but I think it’s wrong to say impossible.

VanCleefArpels · 08/02/2019 07:42

Given my DD has worn glasses since age was 1 I can definitively confirm babies can be myopic 🙄

Mari50 · 08/02/2019 07:45

And yes OP ask for a different optometrist next time.

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 08/02/2019 07:45

He was generalising. Presumably you then told him about your DD’s particular medical conditions and diagnosis. If he still dismissed you, he was a pillock.

Sirzy · 08/02/2019 07:51

I think the key is finding an optician you trust.

I spent the first 7 years of ds life saying his eyes weren’t right. Finally picked up and sent to the opthamology clinic where they tried to say all was fine until a student had a look and picked up on an unusual type of squint.

Now two years down the line he is wearing glasses and they can’t get the prescription right because he is very short sighted and his squint is getting worse (because of said short sightedness!)

If someone had listened earlier we would have been better placed to sort the squint and monitor the rest

SuperMoonIsKeepingMeUpToo · 08/02/2019 07:53

He's wrong about the colour-blindness. If your dad has it, you will definitely be a carrier as it's located on the X chromosome and you would have had to have inherited that chromosome. But your daughter has a 50:50 chance of inheriting that chromosome so has a 50:50 chance of being a carrier.

He was definitely being an arrogant arse, not just because he was wrong, but he didn't take the time to explain the science to you (maybe as he said it he wasn't sure, hence his dismissiveness). And he showed his ignorance about your baby's disease, didn't he?

I'd change optician. I'd have no confidence in him.

llangennith · 08/02/2019 07:55

Sounds like he needs to brush up on his social skills as well as his ophthalmic knowledge.

lanbro · 08/02/2019 07:56

Well my dd got glasses for long sightedness just after her first birthday, picked up early because she also had a lazy eye...

gamerwidow · 08/02/2019 08:00

It’s unusual for babies to be myopic but the correct response from him would have been ‘that’s unusual why do you think your baby might be myopic?’ If he’d taken the chance to get the full picture he wouldn’t have ended up looking like a twat. I wouldn’t want to see someone so dismissive and unwilling to listen again.

ravenmum · 08/02/2019 08:05

"Myopic" specifically means short-sighted, not long-sighted. Most people become short-sighted at around age 7, while long-sightedness develops earlier.

gamerwidow · 08/02/2019 08:17

ravenmum thank you for that definition the OP already understands

ravenmum · 08/02/2019 08:31

That was for the person saying that their child had glasses for long-sightedness at age 1, as if it was relevant...

Original poster

Rhynswynd · 08/02/2019 08:31

I will definitely go to a different Specsavers next time. He was dismissive and a little rude.
He actually said dd8 should just sit closer to the front of the class if she can't see

OP posts:

MarthasGinYard · 08/02/2019 08:37

I tend to avoid all large chain type opticians TBH.

user1468348545 · 08/02/2019 08:48

As a colour blind female it's actually incredibly unusual for women to have and carry the gene.

For a male to be colour blind they only have to pick up the genetic from 1 parent; ergo if one parent is colour blind a male child is almost guaranteed to carry the genetic and present as cb.

For a female to be a carrier and/or present as cb they must get the genetic from both parents.

It sounds more like he's got the information the wrong way round.

Rodders92 · 08/02/2019 09:00

Babies are generally long sighted to start with and their refraction usually changes a lot during the first year due to emmetropisation. Babies can be myopic but it is much less common. For hereditary red green colour vision defects they are x linked recessive so boys who inherit the affected X chromosome from their mother are affected, whereas girls need the affected X chromosome from both parents

underneaththeash · 08/02/2019 09:40

Basically as Rodders92 said. Most children are longsighted, they can sometimes be short-sighted.

Your DD has a 50% chance of being a carrier for colour blindness, unless she is actually colour blind, in which case she will definitely be a carrier.

Wrybread · 08/02/2019 10:09

OP I was born severely myopic. In high prescription glasses under age 2. It's not impossible and I'd go to another optician if mine said that.

Flip

1 2