to be furious that my doctor has "behavioural problem" recorded on my son's medical notes

[deaconblue]

Took ds (3) to the dr today with a sore throast. He hasn't been ill for over a year so we haven't been. Dr asked "how are things with his behavioural problems?" I replied "he hasn't got any behavioural problems" thinking she must have got the wrong notes on her screen. Turns out that because a year ago I telephoned the health visitor for some advice on ways to deal with the hitting phase he went through when dd was born behavioural problems got recorded on his notes.
Am I being over the top to be grrrrrrrr about this? I feel like he's been labelled and I certainly won't be asking for any more advice from the HV, particularly as she didn't have anything useful to suggest that time anyway.

You should have access to electronic notes as well.

I would certainly request to have that changed. 'Behavioural problems' is going to suggest to anyone who reads it that he has ongoing problems or problems that are more than usual toddler behaviour. I would say smacking at two is common toddler behaviour; if I'd been your HV I would have assumed that you were asking for parenting advice rather than suggesting that there was something wrong with your ds.

The problem is, if he does end up in a situation where a doctor doesn't know how something should be diagnosed, having this in his notes could affect the way they approach the problem.

This and countless examples like it are exactly why I have no respect or regard for 99.9% of the HV's out there that I've met or heard of. And exactly why I would never in a million years voluntarily speak to any of them. Ever.

I've gone for a handful of weights and the 2 big checks up to now but am strongly considering turning down the offer of the two year one for my youngest.

I would be livid at a label like that, incandescent.
YA sooooooo NBU

Hitting at that age is not a "behaviourial problem" ; it is completely normal for the age group. YANBU

Behavioural Problems? For hitting? At 2?

Huh? Was your HV on speed?

I think that it wasnt unreasonable for the HV to record that he had a behavioural problem when you contacted them because you were having problems with his behaviour. All she did was to keep a record of what you had contacted her about, and she has to keep a record of the contact that she has with parents.
I think that there is a separate issue of some people obviously feeling that the term 'behavioural problem' is being used in a perjorative way, when I would expect a HV to be thinking of it in a more neutral way.

I think this is an issue of context if you contacted her for advice about a problem with behaviour then it probably would be recorded as a behavioural problem but she could have qualified it with a note that said smacking sister or something
it obviously was a problem fo you or you wouldn't have contacted the hv in the first place
they have to record these contacts what if the behavioural problem was as a result of soemthing sinister or the mother subsequently hit the child due to losing her patience etc etc and was referred on
so I can see why you find it offensive but in hcp speak it wouldn't have the conotations that the general public would give to it I think
and good on the GP for following it up many wouldn't bother

I think it's GREAT that the Doctor read the notes, and the HV recorded the history! YAB overly-sensitive IMO.

But surely all this depends on what was written in the notes and how it was recorded?

For example some practices use electronic notes on a system on which you have to summarise a consultation with a 'problem', then you can add free text.

For example if a child had a rash it may be entered as a 'skin problem', then the free text would indicate the actual ailment.

We don't know in this situation if the consultation was categorised as a 'behaviour problem'. because the mum contacted the HV with a child's behaviour that was, to her at that time, a problem. Then when the GP has looked at the record she may have seen the last presenting 'problem' and commented before reading the free text.

Of course smacking and hitting can be "normal" behaviours for a 2 year old but that doesn't mean they're not a problem that someone might seek help and advice for. It seems to be a question of context and semantics here.

Message withdrawn

Can't see the problem at all.
You consulted HV re a problem with your toddler's behaviour, she recorded it - DR followed it up.

why is everyone so upset.

Chances are 'behavourial problem' is just the phrase the doctor chose to use. What else is he going to say?

I agree with Nancy66 - people getting worked up about nothing.

well...if you google behavioural problems you mostly get referred to sites dealing with real beahvioural problems...not normal behaviour that is problematic...

It's because of an issue similar to this that I have asked my gp to keep mine and my sons notes off this new national database. I found out that it was recorded that we had 'problems at home' and a 'difficult relationship with dad' all because I'd been having an idle conversation and mentioned that dh was in the navy and with all the coming any going and moving around the country I didn't know which way was up!

I feel if notes can't accurately record context (and of course the gp can't write a detailed discourse on each patient) then it's best to be entirely factual as other poster suggested.

I think there is a difference between "the child has behavioural problems" and "I have a problem with my child's behaviour".
The first gives information about the child, the second only about the informant. A HV should be experienced enough to tell the difference and not let the latter be recorded as if it were the former.

I personally find 3yos very difficult to deal with. That doesn't mean that the 3yos I come in contact with have behavioural problems that set them apart from other 3yos. It simply means the normal behaviour of this age group gets on my nerves. My problem, not theirs.

Otoh the next doctor who comes along and reads behavioural problems on the notes of my 3yo might then think it's the 3yo's behavioural problems that need tackling rather than something else.

Nancy may feel this is overreacting, but then I suspect you have never been in a situation where you cannot get the right medical treatment for your child, because somewhere in their notes there is some vague phrase lurking that suggests that they have emotional or social problems. Which some doctors will take to mean that if they say they are in pain, they can't actually mean they're in pain; it's got to be something emotional/social/behavioural. I have been in this situation- it took 4 YEARS for doctors to start accepting that my dd might actually be telling the truth and that she had never actually had emotional problems in the first place; it was a misunderstanding by the first doctor who wrote in her notes. I am very wary about what goes down in my children's medical notes.

cory- exactly my thoughts; labels seem to stick, particularly to children.

The danger is that if you have something like a "difficult relationship with dad" on your notes because of a misunderstanding like the one that happened to maq, and the child then comes in complaining about bad headaches, the consultant may well decide this is a case of child abuse instead of ordering an MRI scan.

Children have died from tumours for this reason before now.

Thankfully, my dd's condition is not a killer: otherwise, we would have been in trouble. And yet her condition was visible to the naked eye, if you only knew where to look. But noone who has read "emotional, query psychosomatic" in the notes, is going to take a second look at the stretchiness of the child's skin, are they? It was pure luck that we already had a referral to a rheumatologist: once that went in the notes, we would never have got another one.

I would make sure this gets removed.

Some 20 years ago, my GP had written "anorexia" on my notes - and then I saw a locum who went demented trying to find out what was wrong, why nothing had been done etc etc when I just went for earache...made me feel very scared.

Turns out the doctor had been very literal saying I had not been eating much/properly (because I had a bad virus for a long time) - not anorexia nervosa as it serious psychiatric illness with high mortality rate.

She refused to remove it because she said that it was literally correct; I changed GP and that's how I got rid of it (they crossed through it for me).

I'd forgotten all about that, but yes, these things are far too open to interpretation/ misconstruing.

Good luck.

Agree totally re the possibility of implications further down the line. The point is that the term "behavioural problems" is factually incorrect.