School conducted a LFT on my son, against my consent

[duckme]

We received an email from our school to say that, due to the increase in covid cases, they are going to resume the LFT scheme in school (secondary) rather than at home. They sent an online consent form for parents to complete. I declined consent. I marked the form as such and sent it back electronically. My son was actually isolating until today as his bubble had burst, but I reminded him that he didn't have consent for the tests so he wasn't to have one. I know mistakes can happen and forms can be misplaced so I wanted to make sure he was fully aware of my consent.
He came home today and informed me that he had the test.
He said the whole class was called the the hall. The lady could see on the list that he hasn't got consent and asked him about it. He repeated what I had told him, 'my mom said, I'm not to have one'. The lady then proceeded to lecture him about protecting his family and friends. He is 13 and gave in to the person of authority in front of him. Despite them having explicit instructions to the contrary.
AIBU in being absolutely livid? That person ignored written consent, ignored the verbal consent of my son and then guilted him into having an invasive test.
I'll be contacting the school tomorrow to complain but I'd like to know if my covid fatigue is making me over react a little. But I can't imagine it being ok for a school to override parental consent in this way pre covid! Have we all surrendered all our our rights now? Even our parental ones?

@Sparklingbrook

and when his older emotionally abusive girlfriend does it in a couple of years to get sex out of him , it’ll be okay because he did it of his own volition in the end after being guilt tripped into it. And that will be okay. Or at least that’s what I’m getting from this thread.

That's quite the leap there. Not what i am getting from this thread at all.

Well we’ve all read the same thread and managed to read different things into it. It’s quite clear many people on this thread only care about coercion in particular situations. Otherwise it’s all good.

‘I'm sickened that some poster likened this to Alfi Evans. Shame on you. This place is disgusting at times.’

For goodness sake quit with with the hyperbole. One of the key elements of the Alfie Evans case was that the parents believed that they had 100% absolute control of their child. That they owned him. And could make every devision about him without the input or intervention of others. That same premise can be applied to ANY situation involving ‘parental consent and the legal position has been made VERY clear in both the Evans and Gard cases ( snd will be used as precedence going forward) We cannot have a society where parents exert ultimate control over minors. Think about the impact that would have on the children of abusive and neglectful patents.As children get older, the concept of Gillick competence is introduced when determining a childs autonomous ability to give consent.

I think it should be your sons choice, so be careful that you are not putting pressure on him one way or another. If it was his choice not to then no pressure should be applied by the school either.
I have had an issue with management for not doing tests for 2 weeks. I havent sue to medication I am on giving me oral thrush. If someone had checked with me politely and if I believed they would have kept it confidential, they would have been told as it was a strongly worded email about how I was endangering other staff was not the way they should have gone about it. Especially after they chose to make me move around the building and put me at risk because 'the rules are a guidance, not a law'

Well we’ve all read the same thread and managed to read different things into it. It’s quite clear many people on this thread only care about coercion in particular situations. Otherwise it’s all good.

Your example was a bit out there TBF. Not sure why you were pondering the hypothetical future sex life of a 13 year old boy.

@Whoarethewho

This is why the UK's soft touch methods of public service provision need to change. Can you imagine any of the south Asian countries allowing to withdraw consent for testing at school? For me it shouldn't be a choice if you want your child to attend school they take a lft in school under supervision. No exceptions. I highly doubt places like China allow all these exceptions

Yes, because we want to be like China, where Human rights are trampled on every day.

In this country, we have the right to consent or not to medical tests. And that includes lateral flow tests. They are not compulsory and nor should they be, not least because their accuracy isn't exactly great.

It’s pretty clear that those posters screaming about Gillick Competency overrides parental consent are not qualified legal professionals but think they understand the law in this area.

There is already guidance that explicitly restricts the ability of Gillick competent children to consent to medical treatment outside of clinical settings. For example, parental consent is required for the treatment of children with asthma using standby salbutamol inhalers in schools.

I’d be extremely surprised and horrified if the courts supported a school nurse coercing a child to have a Covid swab, especially after the school had specifically requested written parental consent.

@duckme.. sorry for not reading the whole thread. You are not being unreasonable.

'It is a legal and ethical principle that valid consent must be obtained before starting personal care, treatment or investigations. This refects the rights of individuals to decide what happens to their own bodies and consent is a fundamental principle of good healthcare and professional practice.
Healthcare professionals (or other non-registered healthcare workers) who do not respect these principles may be liable to legal action and/or action by their professional body.'

'For consent to immunisation to the valid, it must be given freely, voluntarily and without coercion by an appropriately informed person who has the mental capacity to consent to the administration of the vaccines in question. This will be the person themselves, someone with parental responsibility for an individual under the age of 18 years'

'At 16 years of age a young person is presumed in law to have the capacity to consent, so young people aged 16 or 17 years should consent to their own medical treatment. '

'If a person aged 16 or 17 years or a Gillick-competent child refuses treatment that refusal should be accepted.'

Gillick Competency was not intended to be used to coerce children above the age of 13 into procedures that their parents did not consent to on their behalf. It's original intention was to allow children above the age of 13 to consent to contraception where their parents did not consent to this and has also been used to allow children to consent or refuse medical treatment for example in cancer cases.

It is applied often used in case of school immunisation programmes along with quite a bit of coercion on the part of those involved in rolling out these programmes, in my opinion, it is not lawful but as far as I know, this behaviour has not been tested in court.

The quotes above are from..

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/994850/PHE_Greenbook_of_immunisation_chapter_2_consent_18_June21.pdf

Once again the LFTs are irrelevant. It's irrelevant how easy or not intrusive it is. As are the opinions on having or not having it, COVID or anything else.

The school wanted OP's son to do something.
The school asked OP for consent.
OP did not give consent.
On the day they knew he did not have parental consent.(He shouldn't have been in that line to begin with)
He said that he did not have parental consent.(TBH it should've stopped there)
Then an adult shamed him into doing it anyways.

This is not ok or acceptable in any situation. Otherwise why bother with consent forms at all,especially in secondary?

@Mrstamborineman

Your son does not need your consent at 13 to have LFT. YABVVVVVVVVVVU and petty. It makes 0 (zero) difference to you.

Yet the school asked for it. If no consent was needed, no consent form would be sent home in the first place.

It will be interesting to hear what the school say today. The consent form was sent digitally and not a piece of paper that can be lost. Did staff just not check? What actually happened and what was said leading up to him having the LFT against his will etc.

@ObviousNameChage

Once again the LFTs are irrelevant. It's irrelevant how easy or not intrusive it is. As are the opinions on having or not having it, COVID or anything else.

The school wanted OP's son to do something.
The school asked OP for consent.
OP did not give consent.
On the day they knew he did not have parental consent.(He shouldn't have been in that line to begin with)
He said that he did not have parental consent.(TBH it should've stopped there)
Then an adult shamed him into doing it anyways.

This is not ok or acceptable in any situation. Otherwise why bother with consent forms at all,especially in secondary?

Totally agree.

It's irrelevant that it was for a lateral flow test. And it's irrelevant what others views are on testing. What is relevant is parental consent was requested and not given and the school overrode that.

Those who think the DS was coerced/shamed/guilted into taking the test... how would you explain clearly the reason for taking it without mentioning that it's to protect vulnerable people around you?

Also, taking a LFT is a lot more reliable than not taking it

@TheHeathenOfSuburbia

Those who think the DS was coerced/shamed/guilted into taking the test... how would you explain clearly the reason for taking it without mentioning that it's to protect vulnerable people around you?

Also, taking a LFT is a lot more reliable than not taking it

There was no need to explain anything.

If there was a safeguarding issue which meant my child couldn't appear in the media and I had declined consent for him to be on the media via school, but the bbc visited his school and wanted to do a piece about the Euros. My son really wanted to be involved in the piece and asked the teacher to let him take part. Should they then take his consent over mine?

I would hope that at 13 years old your son would be aware of the safeguarding issue (to an appropriate of detail) and would understand why he couldn't be involved and therefore wouldn't be asking the teacher to let him take part.

@Happymum12345

You sound like you’re teaching your ds how to be a responsible adult. What a delight you are.

Definitely. Lots of parents aren't teaching their sons about consent, so I'm pleased to read this OP is teaching her son all about consent and coerced consent.

@Killahangilion

It’s pretty clear that those posters screaming about Gillick Competency overrides parental consent are not qualified legal professionals but think they understand the law in this area.

There is already guidance that explicitly restricts the ability of Gillick competent children to consent to medical treatment outside of clinical settings. For example, parental consent is required for the treatment of children with asthma using standby salbutamol inhalers in schools.

I’d be extremely surprised and horrified if the courts supported a school nurse coercing a child to have a Covid swab, especially after the school had specifically requested written parental consent.

It's you who don't understand.

Gillick competence is a statement of the law as it relates to healthcare.

Children's legal rights to make decisions are not restricted to what's covered in the Gillick judgement, as many posters seem to believe. Gillick is just the best known case that tested the law relating to children's rights. It's not the law in itself, it's just an example of the law in action (albeit with the authority of the highest court).

Since Gillick, statute law (acts of Parliament) have reinforced the right of competent children to make decisions independently of parents. This is much, much broader than healthcare. GDPR/DPA 2018 is one example- in most cases, a child over 13 can stop its parents accessing its data.

Competent children can make decisions independently of parents, and that over-ride parents' wishes, in many, many situations.

Agreed kolo

A bit worrying that consent doesn’t apparently matter when it’s something you approve of. Great message that, Mumsnet. Slow hand clap.

YANBU!!

Your consent was overridden. Absolutely dodgy territory and I'm shocked at so many not caring about that fact.

jt would appear tat your son is more of an adult than you are.

I'm with you OP - the school should not have overridden your decision.

You don't think the test is reliable - fair enough (I have no experience of it, we don't use it in Australia as far as I know) - so you've had a discussion with your son and decided it's not worth him having them.

He knew that, the school knew you hadn't given consent, he TOLD them that you hadn't given consent and then he was coerced into having the test anyway.

That is absolutely inappropriate, regardless of what the consent was concerning. This idea that parents aren't able to make decisions for their children any more, and that the school "knows better", is getting quite scary but is happening in more than one area.

Children should NOT be coerced by school into doing something that neither they nor their parent(s) have given consent for - slippery slope!

A bit worrying that consent doesn’t apparently matter when it’s something you approve of. Great message that, Mumsnet. Slow hand clap.

Yup. Appalling.

@duckme as several other posters have questioned ( and you’ve ignored) what do you plan to do when, come September school bubbles for secondary will be removed to be replaced with daily LFT?

Do you
A) ignore the remit and send him in anyway - selfish behaviour towards the rest of his school and friends.
B) Keep him home for 10days when he potentially doesn’t need to be- unfair to your child.

Do you not take your child for eye tests? The dentist? They are now more “invasive “ as you call it. In fact they both warrant people being up close to your child compared to your child doing a minor thing for themselves!

@TheKeatingFive

A bit worrying that consent doesn’t apparently matter when it’s something you approve of. Great message that, Mumsnet. Slow hand clap.

Yup. Appalling.

Consent does matter.

The OP should never have been asked to consent for a competent child in the first place because, under U.K. law, it wasn't hers to give and wasn't legally valid.

It was therefore perfectly legal for the school to ignore the OP's wishes. The school's error was in asking her for consent, creating the impression that she had the right to choose. I don't blame the OP for being angry in the circumstances.

If the DS was pressured, his consent wasn't valid. But that is equally true if the pressure came from the school or the OP. And, even if the DS felt coerced, that still didn't mean that the OP's refusal of consent on his behalf was valid.

@ThumbWitchesAbroad

I'm with you OP - the school should not have overridden your decision.

You don't think the test is reliable - fair enough (I have no experience of it, we don't use it in Australia as far as I know) - so you've had a discussion with your son and decided it's not worth him having them.

He knew that, the school knew you hadn't given consent, he TOLD them that you hadn't given consent and then he was coerced into having the test anyway.

That is absolutely inappropriate, regardless of what the consent was concerning. This idea that parents aren't able to make decisions for their children any more, and that the school "knows better", is getting quite scary but is happening in more than one area.

Children should NOT be coerced by school into doing something that neither they nor their parent(s) have given consent for - slippery slope!

Yeah it's quite scary. We are seeing it with gender issues as well but won't derail thread with that.

@FrangipaniBlue

If there was a safeguarding issue which meant my child couldn't appear in the media and I had declined consent for him to be on the media via school, but the bbc visited his school and wanted to do a piece about the Euros. My son really wanted to be involved in the piece and asked the teacher to let him take part. Should they then take his consent over mine?

I would hope that at 13 years old your son would be aware of the safeguarding issue (to an appropriate of detail) and would understand why he couldn't be involved and therefore wouldn't be asking the teacher to let him take part.

They might understand but the desire to be involved in a tv project with their friends about something they love might override that.