Page 14 | to decline cervical screening offer?

Teacupsandtoast · 2022-08-30T17:06:13+00:00

Just that really. Is there a simple process for opting out or is there hoop jumping required? (Which often seems to be the case when it comes to withdrawing consent for anything)

WhileMyGuitarGentlyWeeps · 30/08/2022 23:10

Sooverthisnow · 30/08/2022 23:09

It’s again assuming that everyone who declines screening is ultimately going to be diagnosed with a horrible cancer

I know right. As I said, dreadful and shameful scaremongering!

ClaudineClare · 30/08/2022 23:11

But without screening you are gambling with the unknown. So no, I really don't understand it. But as has been said many times on this thread, your body, your choice

But with screening you are also gambling with the unknown as it is impossible to tell at an early stage whether the cancer detected will become problematic, so you may risk overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

Sooverthisnow · 30/08/2022 23:11

MumofSpud · 30/08/2022 23:09

But how can they find a problem if you aren't screened?

Show quote history

There might not be a problem to find.
or there might and it may come to light later….which may or may not be cancer.

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 30/08/2022 23:11

What dreadful scaremongering. Shame on you.

I'm sorry if you find my, my friends' and my family members' experiences scaremongering. I found them incredibly scary and sad. Some of them didn't have a happy ending. That's the reality, not scaremongering

XenoBitch · 30/08/2022 23:11

Sooverthisnow · 30/08/2022 23:09

It’s again assuming that everyone who declines screening is ultimately going to be diagnosed with a horrible cancer

I said that too..

So many people saying you will die from cervical cancer if you don't get screened. Total bull.

WhileMyGuitarGentlyWeeps · 30/08/2022 23:12

Sooverthisnow · 30/08/2022 22:54

But the mammogram would happen “if” a lump was found. A lump might not ever be found, and no mammogram performed, thus saving the nhs. You’re making the assumption that all women who decline screening will suffer from terrible stage 4 cancer, and they wont.
Screen is about choice. To try and blackmail people into it by threatening to withhold treatment if something is found later is just wrong.

Show quote history

Exactly this. ^ Women bullying and goading other women into doing what they think THEY should do and calling them fucking oddballs and weirdos and so on, for not falling into line, is just disgusting. GET THIS... I won't be bullied into doing something I DO NOT WANT TO DO ---- yes yes yes shouty angry capitals, and IDGAF if that offends your dinky little eyes @hangrylady

People trying to bully and coerce and SHAME WOMEN INTO TOEING THE LINE can just jog on. And as for the posters throwing nasty insults and berating women who don't behave like good iccle girls and do what they're told? Well THEIR behaviour speaks volumes about them.

whatsthestory123 · 30/08/2022 23:12

i found out i had HPV this time lasy year im booked in for another test in 2 weeks
and thank my lucky stars this service is avaliable

so many seem to think they know better than medical staff,if they ended up with cancer they would soon change their minds and expect treatment,im sure women in less developed countries would beg for this treatment

ShhDoNotTell · 30/08/2022 23:12

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 30/08/2022 23:04

Because some people do not want screening that they may find invasive or may give a false positive. Some people don’t want to spend time worrying about this stuff but would rather be proactive when symptomatic. It’s not that difficult to understand.

I'm sorry but I do find it difficult to understand. People who would 'rather be proactive when symptomatic' are opening themselves up to way more invasive procedures. If you don't like the thought of a mammogram, try having a mastectomy like my friend who didn't go for screening, found a lump by which time she had to lose her breast. Another friend who didn't have a lump but had cancer discovered by her mammogram also had a mastectomy and was told a few months later would probably have been too late. A hysterectomy is way more uncomfortable than a smear. Chemo and radiotherapy are not pleasant either. Of course, you could be clear and have undergone the discomfort of screening 'for nothing' But without screening you are gambling with the unknown. So no, I really don't understand it. But as has been said many times on this thread, your body, your choice.

You’re gambling every single day of your life. Some people just don’t agree with the particular choices you make. You’re suggesting that because someone you know had a diagnosis everybody will avoid same said diagnoses by screening. It’s simply not true.

LadyVictoriaSponge · 30/08/2022 23:13

Screening has harms as well as benefits

MumofSpud · 30/08/2022 23:14

Invasive - yes
Unpleasant - yes

But if you ended up with cervical cancer the treatment would be much more invasive and unpleasant- unless of course you'd opt out of that as well

I found my local sexual health clinic great for doing these as they did so many they were v v experienced!

ShhDoNotTell · 30/08/2022 23:15

whatsthestory123 · 30/08/2022 23:12

i found out i had HPV this time lasy year im booked in for another test in 2 weeks
and thank my lucky stars this service is avaliable

so many seem to think they know better than medical staff,if they ended up with cancer they would soon change their minds and expect treatment,im sure women in less developed countries would beg for this treatment

Once again: treatment and screening are NOT the same thing.

BadNomad · 30/08/2022 23:15

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 30/08/2022 23:04

Because some people do not want screening that they may find invasive or may give a false positive. Some people don’t want to spend time worrying about this stuff but would rather be proactive when symptomatic. It’s not that difficult to understand.

I'm sorry but I do find it difficult to understand. People who would 'rather be proactive when symptomatic' are opening themselves up to way more invasive procedures. If you don't like the thought of a mammogram, try having a mastectomy like my friend who didn't go for screening, found a lump by which time she had to lose her breast. Another friend who didn't have a lump but had cancer discovered by her mammogram also had a mastectomy and was told a few months later would probably have been too late. A hysterectomy is way more uncomfortable than a smear. Chemo and radiotherapy are not pleasant either. Of course, you could be clear and have undergone the discomfort of screening 'for nothing' But without screening you are gambling with the unknown. So no, I really don't understand it. But as has been said many times on this thread, your body, your choice.

Do you get screened for leukaemia regularly? Do you get yearly MRIs to check you're not getting a brain tumour? X-rays of your lungs? Skin checks? Do you ask? Are we "gambling with the unknown" by not insisting on having these checked?

These things aren't checked routinely. They're done based on symptoms. The cancer that comes from these is not any less devastating than cervical or breast cancer. Yet for some reason we insist on pushing women into having invasive examinations from a young age "just in case".

WhileMyGuitarGentlyWeeps · 30/08/2022 23:15

XenoBitch · 30/08/2022 23:11

I said that too..

So many people saying you will die from cervical cancer if you don't get screened. Total bull.

Show quote history

This. ^

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 30/08/2022 23:16

You’re gambling every single day of your life. Some people just don’t agree with the particular choices you make. You’re suggesting that because someone you know had a diagnosis everybody will avoid same said diagnoses by screening. It’s simply not true.

It's not 'someone', it's lots of people. And the number is rising the older I get. I've also personal experience.

I think if you're anti screening, you're anti screening and as previously said, it's your own personal choice.

WhileMyGuitarGentlyWeeps · 30/08/2022 23:16

BadNomad · 30/08/2022 23:15

Do you get screened for leukaemia regularly? Do you get yearly MRIs to check you're not getting a brain tumour? X-rays of your lungs? Skin checks? Do you ask? Are we "gambling with the unknown" by not insisting on having these checked?

These things aren't checked routinely. They're done based on symptoms. The cancer that comes from these is not any less devastating than cervical or breast cancer. Yet for some reason we insist on pushing women into having invasive examinations from a young age "just in case".

Show quote history

LOL, you've cornered them there! 😂

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 30/08/2022 23:17

Do you get screened for leukaemia regularly? Do you get yearly MRIs to check you're not getting a brain tumour? X-rays of your lungs? Skin checks? Do you ask? Are we "gambling with the unknown" by not insisting on having these checked?

No because I'm not offered them. If I was, I would take them up.

ShhDoNotTell · 30/08/2022 23:18

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 30/08/2022 23:16

You’re gambling every single day of your life. Some people just don’t agree with the particular choices you make. You’re suggesting that because someone you know had a diagnosis everybody will avoid same said diagnoses by screening. It’s simply not true.

It's not 'someone', it's lots of people. And the number is rising the older I get. I've also personal experience.

I think if you're anti screening, you're anti screening and as previously said, it's your own personal choice.

The older you get the higher your chances of dying from pretty much everything. You do realise you will die from something, yes?

I’m not anti-screening. I’m anti specific screenings where the evidence simply does not measure up.

Chouetted · 30/08/2022 23:18

RichardMarxisinnocent · 30/08/2022 23:09

Yes I do know that thank you. But it's a very low risk, and as I had no other risk factors (other than my age) I was happy with my decision to not have screening until I became sexually active.

I'd make the same decision again, especially now that they only actually screen the cells for changes if you're HPV postive. There was zero chance of me having HPV so my sample would never be checked for changes, and any non HPV related changes would never have been picked up. So the screening would have been entirely pointless.

Show quote history

This is my reasoning. The smear itself is not a no-risk procedure, especially if you then potentially undergo unnecessary follow-up for a non-existent cancer.

There is a low risk of picking up HPV at birth, but my mother and father have only ever been sexually active with each other, so she doesn't have it either. Once you go back further than that in the generations, you're compounding low risk with low risk, and it is basically zero - I'd have far more risk of being killed by a car on my way to the smear appointment.

ClaudineClare · 30/08/2022 23:18

I think it is really worrying that so many people are unaware of the risks as well as the benefits of screening and the importance of balancing the two when making the choice on whether or not to take up the invitation to be screened. Key word is invitation. You can accept or decline.

justasking111 · 30/08/2022 23:19

Haven't heard anything from anyone for a few years, covid I guess. My annual asthma check also vanished. No bowl cancer screening either. I think our Welsh health trust has shut up shop

XenoBitch · 30/08/2022 23:19

BadNomad · 30/08/2022 23:15

Do you get screened for leukaemia regularly? Do you get yearly MRIs to check you're not getting a brain tumour? X-rays of your lungs? Skin checks? Do you ask? Are we "gambling with the unknown" by not insisting on having these checked?

These things aren't checked routinely. They're done based on symptoms. The cancer that comes from these is not any less devastating than cervical or breast cancer. Yet for some reason we insist on pushing women into having invasive examinations from a young age "just in case".

Show quote history

I keep asking why screening for a female reproductive issue keeps getting brought up.. and anyone not wanting to get a test is subject to vitriol and name calling...
I am still waiting for an answer.

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 30/08/2022 23:21

So many people saying you will die from cervical cancer if you don't get screened. Total bull.

Has anyone actually said that? I think what most people are saying is that screening might ( only might, I accept) help catch something early enough to make treatment less invasive and more likely to have a positive outcome.

ClaudineClare · 30/08/2022 23:22

justasking111 · 30/08/2022 23:19

Haven't heard anything from anyone for a few years, covid I guess. My annual asthma check also vanished. No bowl cancer screening either. I think our Welsh health trust has shut up shop

Funnily enough me and DH have both had bowel cancer testing packs recently. We are in South Wales. I'm waiting for an empty yogurt pot to make itself available! 😃

Chouetted · 30/08/2022 23:23

XenoBitch · 30/08/2022 23:19

I keep asking why screening for a female reproductive issue keeps getting brought up.. and anyone not wanting to get a test is subject to vitriol and name calling...
I am still waiting for an answer.

Show quote history

I would actually love a skin check, having had terrible sunburn on my back during childhood. I could be breeding a huge melanoma back there, and I'd never know - but I don't think it's offered on the NHS...

XenoBitch · 30/08/2022 23:29

Chouetted · 30/08/2022 23:23

I would actually love a skin check, having had terrible sunburn on my back during childhood. I could be breeding a huge melanoma back there, and I'd never know - but I don't think it's offered on the NHS...

Show quote history

Now, that is something that should be screened for. A simple look around at your GP surgery.
I have known of a few people who lost family to skin cancer... you do not have been a sun worshiper to get cancer.