To be so annoyed with bloody paternalistic NHS

[MyKindHiker]

I am a lifetime migraine sufferer and as I'm getting closer to menopause they are getting worse in frequency and severity. At least half of all days I wake up with some form of aura, go through packs of nurofen and sumatriptan. Anyways it's been years since I considered any intervention other than just taking meds when one coming on (not necessary as not that frequent through adulthood), but I gather from talking to others there are some really effective meds available now which can prevent them entirely.

Go to GP who looks at recent bloodwork done to check my hormones and says as I'm still fertile and having periods, he can't prescribe in case I get pregnant while on them. I explain I have 2 kids and don't want more. In fact, can't technically have more anyway due to birth injury with second. And husband has had vasectomy to prevent accidental pregnancy as due to birth injury I could get pregnant but couldn't carry baby to anywhere near term. Which is beside the point as I do not want any more kids anyway.

Anyway doc says I still can't have the meds and the rule is for women of childbearing age the rule is they need to go to a special clinic with a 12 month waiting list and do all the steps first (elimination diet etc... I have TRIED THIS OVER 30 YEARS) and prove I'm not pregnant.

I mean what is with these people? If I was a man, I would have just got the meds to prevent a very debilitating condition. But because I'm a woman I can't have the meds 'in case' I become pregnant as though I'm just a uterus on legs who can't think for myself and decide not to become pregnant? Why is my word not enough that I will not have an affair with a non-vasectomied man and get myself up the spout. Ridiculous.

It’s really not a similar thing at all. This is a medical condition having a significant negative effect on OP’s quality of life.

Have you had a brain scan?

44 year old here who just went BACK on the combined pill. Or are women on here CHOOSING not to go on the pill? Which is fine, but it's not a rule.

I did and got one. Almost stopped migraines. Completely, same with cold sores. Was the most wonderful thing imaginable. I might have a migraines once a year instead of every month and they aren't as bad.

Have a copper coil fitted? That's not hormonal. Would they consider you then?

Ask for an appointment with another gp. I suffered with seriously bad acne for years I was practically begging the same gp to get me referred for roaccutane treatment he wouldn’t for years kept coming up with excuses so I just asked for another gp (god knows why I didn’t think of this sooner) this was years ago though and I always seemed to have the same dr but as soon as I saw a different one he referred me for what I asked for

I was not allowed the pill from 40.

think I could have the mini pill but was advised to have mirena.

Neither worked so I had a hysterectomy but mine was adenomyosis.

OP o agree with you. I can understand why if there’s serve birth defect risk they make this call as it’s unethical to force an abortion however things should also be case by case and your own medical history doesn’t allow a continued pregnancy so there is
no reason for them to assume that risk.

The GP will need to follow the pregnancy prevention programme which I linked above if the OP wants topiramate or sodium valproate.,

OP, ignore @Extragreen - it's clear they are one of those goady posters. I have reported them and some of their posts have been deleted. I would encourage others to do the same with all of @Extragreens posts if they are similarly goady.

Nothing you say will satisfy them. They will pick holes in everything you say. There are many of this type of poster on mumsnet at the moment, and the best thing to do is deny them oxygen. It's best not to address any of their posts as they are not posting in the right spirit and only wish to minimise your very valid concerns. Simply ignore them! (sorry, didn't meant to derail!)

And good luck getting help with your migraines!

Bet that doctor still thinks TWAW though.

I explained how it is similar - 'nanny state blanket guidelines implying that we are all too stupid to make sensible decisions for ourselves!'

That is where the similarities end I agree but it was where my thoughts went. Not trying to belittle the issue here just adding another dimension to the conversation.

Precisely this. I have had to go on meds at various points during my “childbearing years”, inc my 20s, that can have an affect on a fetus - deformity etc, quite drastic effects that would absolutely lead to major deformities, even if they somehow did make it to term, so likely wouldn’t live anyway - in particular one, that the effects were so serious they had to make sure you were on/using some kind of contraception (at the time I wasn’t using any, for various reasons, but mostly because I wasn’t currently having in sex/in a relationship, but if I was then I understood I needed to use/take contraception), that you had to sign a form saying you were told about the risks and that if you did get pregnant that you would have to agree to an abortion as the effects would be so devastating they basically wouldn’t be “compatible with life”. So in this particular case (plus an entirely different sort of med I’m on now, which they have only just started advising against pregnancy, but again they just warn you against this but you are still allowed to take it, you’re just more aware now. I’m technically/theoretically able to get pregnant still as I’m not yet menopausal [we don’t think, and I’m still advised to use contraception even at this age 50+ because there is still a small possibility] but I’m still allowed the agency to make my own mind up), the one I was on in my 20s, it really was dangerous for a fetus, and I wasn’t in any kind of relationship at that point anyway (as far as I can remember!) so wasn’t using any kind of contraception but was aware that I would have to have an abortion if I did get pregnant, but I was still allowed the meds because I signed the form and was in control of my own body and the consequences of becoming pregnant. I wasn’t denied the drug because I wasn’t on effective/any kind of contraception, I knew I’d have to use contraception if I was to have sex and the consequences of getting pregnant and what that would mean - an abortion. I don’t understand why this can’t be the case for the drug the op needs too.

And yes, like others have said not being a man is relevant, because it should make jo difference which sex you are, and whether you’re biologically able to become pregnant or not, because you can be responsible enough to manage the contraception side of things and not become pregnant. Sex should not come into it. There are disclaimers you can sign - including that legally you’d have to have an abortion on drugs that would lead to extreme and severe effects on a fetus, because the drugs were so damaging. Including, also for a period of x number of months after coming off the drug. But we were allowed to use our own agency and decide for ourselves if we wanted to go ahead with the drug, knowing all the consequences and signing these forms.

@gemma9239 it’s not about nanny state guidelines, it’s about safety. Have you read the pregnancy prevention programme?

I had exactly the same thing said to me a few years ago - I was getting migraines that waxed and waned in intensity but essentially went on for weeks and months at a time. GP wouldn't refer me to neurology until I had tried one antidepressant as a prophylactic, a beta blocker, and then Topiramate - without trying all three unsuccessfully I couldn't be referred. But the GP also refused to prescribe Topiramate to me as it can cause birth defects and I am of child bearing age. Which seems a bit of a daft double whammy as migraines mostly (but not always) affect women of childbearing age. Anyway during Covid I saw a different (female) GP who agreed to trial it .... it didn't work and I ended up being referred to neurology anyway but now I'm able to get Botox which helps enormously.Can you see a different GP?

More likely they're jumpy after it being prescribed to women as a cheap treatment for bipolar/medication resistant depression (ie, it being related to their environment/abuse and not their brains) for years without bothering to tell them that it's teratogenic even whilst they were pregnant.

Used to work in gynaecology. The consultant wanted to go to the local psych department and batter the boss senseless because of the numbers of women he'd seen that a) hadn't been told and b) were told to keep taking it.

I take a medication (for an autoimmune condition) that you aren't allowed to get pregnant on. Beyond being asked if I'm using contraception it's never been a deal breaker in having my medication prescribed? (Medication causes birth defects and there is a 3 month wash out period between taking this medication and being able to ttc)

I am agog that even with your DH having had a vasectomy, you are being denied this medication @MyKindHiker

I am so sorry you are going through this. Please contact The National Migraine Centre (see link) they will help you, even if you can make a donation.

www.nationalmigrainecentre.org.uk/migraine-clinic/funding-your-appointment/

@Crunchymum it depends on the medication - for topiramate and sodium valproate the prescriber must follow the pregnancy prevention programme. And the OPs husband isn’t the only man who can get her pregnant - it is about her fertility not his.

Your GP sounds heavy-handed. I would get a private GP to prescribe for me. Once you have it on your scripts, you shouldn’t need another appointment.

Plenty of people are prescribed this for epilepsy- I know a few who are female and of childbearing age. If it is this drug then that seems unfair that OP can’t have it.

it’s ridiculous OP. I’m so sorry 😔

@80smonster a private GP would also have to follow the pregnancy prevention programme.

@rainbowsandraspberrygin and they will all have received a risk assessment for prescribing under the pregnancy prevention programme which ensure they are using highly effective contraception.

So Op's husband having had a vasectomy doesn't count as being on a "pregnancy prevention programme"?

Is that because a vasectomy isn't a reliable form of contraception then..?

Oh yes - I’m not saying they shouldn’t have it. But if the OP can’t carry a child and her husband has had the snip - surely she should be able to have it too.

Not my experience - GP just wouldn’t prescribe it. I’ve no health conditions, healthy weight. GP is actually the practices women’s health go-to person.