Mandatory to be classed as a 'vulnerable woman'?

[username009]

I've been for my booking appointment today. I'm 19.
The midwife explained that it is mandatory to put in some sort of referral for 'vulnerable women' as I'm under 20. I agreed but it didn't sit right, especially since DM (has worked as a GP receptionist) clarified that it comes up in big flashing letters on medical files etc that you're vulnerable.

It doesn't sit right with me that just because a person is under 20 they're classed and documented as 'vulnerable'. Surely there's a lot of other mums who are over 20 and actually vulnerable but wouldn't have that assumption automatically made about them?

AIBU here or is there anything I can do about this?

It's nice guidance, being a younger mother is classed as a complex social factor.
Congratulations on your pregnancy :)

Under 20s, Stealth?

I'm classed as vulnerable and on the Falls Register of my local health authority. I'm disabled and in my 40s. I don't feel offended at being deemed vulnerable. I know that the NHS is tasked with reducing falls among those prone to them, which can only be a good thing, and being involved with the local team means I can access support, physio or occupational therapy for instance, if I feel it will help me at any particular time. Vulnerable is just a word; please don't take it personally.

My 16 year went to her booking appointment with me and they wrote ‘vulnerable’ before starting the appointment! We asked them to explain and we got the socio-economic stuff.

My DD explained quite succinctly that she was far from vulnerable, and well supported and it was removed easily.

Oh stop with the demeaning shite.

OP it means that you have different issues, could be medically vulnerable as much as anything else. That this is your 2nd child increases that, though it does, obviously, decrease other potential issues.

If you have any questions just ask her. Find out what she thinks you specifically might be vulnerable to. You won't know what it means for you unless you ask.

And congratulations

Manclife1. No, commissioning is far broader than just how many.

Commissioning has to consider the complexity of service provision and the demographics of the local population.
As an example, Brighton has very successfully reduced the number of teenage pregnancies through effective commissioning of school nursing services and sexual health services and shard commissioning responsibilities through a section 75 arrangement which results in joined up provision and improved outcomes. It is absolutely about identifying the most vulnerable and ensuring there are adequate services to meet their needs by purchasing appropriate clinical pathways.

Today 20:19 RubberTreePlant

Under 20s, Stealth

Yes, just double checked. Its cg110

You’re 19, and on your second pregnancy, the first being ‘a few years ago’? That makes you sound pretty vulnerable to me, to be honest.

@CherryPavlova identifying groups not individuals. That is done on a 1-2-1 basis and following a consultation or information from different sources NOT because they happen to fall into an ‘at risk’ category. That’s discrimination plain and simple.

@CassianAndor define vulnerable!

It's a risk factor, in the same way as, say, gestation diabetes in a previois pregnancy

I got flamed on another thread for enquiring if someone was a vulnerable adult, so to clearly does have negative connotations.

You should ask to see the policy, this should include why they consider every prefab they woman under 20 to be vulnerable, and what the label actually means in terms of treatment and response.

I can see why it might be applied to those under 17 or even 18. You are an adult, seems a bit OTT.

The guidance is frim nice

OP from where I’m standing, having two children before you’re 20 sounds like a pretty bad idea. Was either pregnancy planned?

Manclife1 it’s about safeguarding based on risk. It’s about optimising outcomes. It’s about ensuring children don’t fall through great loopholes created by failing to identify highest risk cohort. It’s about ensuring the welfare of unborn children. The welfare of the child has to be the paramount and guiding principle - as opposed to a teenage mother feeling a bit miffed about being appropriately labelled as more vulnerable.

I appreciate where you are coming from.
In social care, we prefer to use the term “at risk”. Vulnerable is an emotionally loaded word and I dislike it intensely but not hugely surprised the paternalistic NHS haven’t shed it yet. You could say to someone that being a young mum means you are at risk of X, Y and Z.

Thanks stealth.

I just found kt OP. You can read the rationale for yourself here:

www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG110/chapter/1-Guidance#young-pregnant-women-aged-under-20

@CherryPavlova you keep talking bout valiant general principles however that’s not how it works. Each person has to be treated as an individual and bespoke risk assessments made based on their needs. Of course the fact the person is at increased risk should be part of that assessment but just saying “your 19 and therefore vulnerable” goes against safeguarding principles. Not just that but risks flooding already overstretched specialist resources with unnecessary referrals. Also, to make the referrals the OP has to consent which at 19 she’s well within her rights to do. The NHS is notorious for paying lip service to people’s rights.

@RubberTreePlant where does it say under 20’s are ‘vulnerable’ and should be labelled as such?

Explains why agencies are swamped with a tidal wave of vulnerable people. I was told on another example of an agency clarifying anyone over 50 as vulnerable. It's a complete farce the state this country is getting in. Obviously need the nanny state interfering at every point in our lives when those that really need help don't get anything

It's a description of what they call complex social factors. Vulnerability will have been their wording.

Manclife1 I understand fully how it works. It certainly doesn’t go against safeguarding principles and doesn’t negate the individual risk assessments. It is not saying there are problems but that staff should be alert to potential problems. It’s purely to alert involved professionals to consider the increased risk. You can’t meet someone whose a second time mother at 19 and say they seem pleasant, so let’s ignore the warning factors. The right is for the children’s welfare takes precedence over feeling miffed.

It’s not particularly pleasant being called elderly at 35 either but it does help ensure the type of care offered is appropriate and risks are considered.

Specialist services for teenage mothers are included within NICE guidance. www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg110/chapter/1-Guidance

OP you should ask your MW about this. Ime people respond well when you are really honest so I would contact her and say "you know you said I was being referred on due to being vulnerable? If I'm honest that upset me quite a bit as I feel you are stereotyping due to my age. Can you explain why you think I am vulnerable? Or if it's all U20s, why that group is automatically classed as vulnerable? It doesn't sit right with me."

See what she says and make your own mind up.

Discrimination for sure.

Sweetdreamer how so? How is the OP being discriminated against?