A and E database

[ZebraInHiding]

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/27/every-child-accident-emergency-dabatase

I thought they did this anyway? Don't they senda note to your health visitor?

Do you agree with it or do you think it will make people worry more? Whilst I can see the good in it, I worry that kids just won't get taken for help any more. Not sure what the solution is though. :(

It is very hard to match up this; m.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20226345a which I think is absolutely inappropriate for an MP/MPs to say but likely the motivation behind this database.

With this; m.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/18/most-damaged-children-care-failed

Or this;
www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/children-in-care-when-a-childs-home-is-provided-by-the-state-they-should-be-able-to-feel-safe-8226754.html

Mrsd - "They talked to me like I was a piece of utter crap. In public and with no regard for my privacy or my (now) Ds's."

This is exactly what a lot of the mums I work with experience all the time - if they are red flagged as having been a heavy drug user in the past a lot of health professionals or other people in positions of authority will simply disregard the fact that they might have been clean for three years now, and many don't take into account the shockingly low levels of adult literacy in some parts of the country and hand over books and long pamphlets on how to feed your child etc. when the mum in question can't actually read any of it, and then tell her off for not knowing which foods the child should be getting.

I don't envy the decision makers who have to formulate these types of policy because they are a very tricky area to implement and get right

One of the saddest things I have read about Victoria Climbe is that when she wet herself in fear when her 'aunt' approached her in hospital, this was explained by some hospital staff as a natural reaction of an African child who was taught to respect her elders.

Some very well meaning attempt to be culturally sensitive lead to a complete misreading of the situation. And that for me underscores the huge problem with a data base which relies on information to be entered sensitively and sensibly. Depending on your own view of the parents in questions - do you dislike them because you assume they are abusers or do you not want to judge them in case you are labled racist or similar. All of this will have an impact.

The obvious answer is more training, more help for front line staff to deal with these situations efficiently and humanely - not treating someone like shit because an assumption is made at an early stage. I saw this happen with one client - the doctors believed he had sexually abused his 3 year old daugther on the basis of bruising which were later found to have spontaneously arisen due to a virus. Their recordings of interviews with him, the examinations to which this little girl were subjected were horrible - invasive, insensitive and ultimately proved to be on a false basis.

But the answer to this is not, don't question parents, don't record info - just, as everyone is saying - make sure you ask the right questions in the right way, keep an open mind and don't assume anything.

A much better answer is to ban corporal punishment. It can be shown to drastically reduce the levels of child deaths at the hands of the parents without criminalising parents. Victoria climbie was killed by a woman who believed in corporal punishment and escalated the levels of violence she was subjected to in a society that sanctions the use of corporal punishment by caregivers as a valid and effectively method of discipline against the research, evidence and opinions of the UN and other organisations.

offred - I dont believe in proper corporal punishment in the slightest (tho I do have sympathy for parents who deliver literally a tap on the bum to a toddler who is physically lashing out or putting themselves in danger) but while I verery much agree that this type of discipline usually causes mych more harm than good and ought not to be practiced, I do think there is a massive issue over enforcing a law like this. How can anyone police what goes on (or does not go on) behind closed doors? Will neighbours start informing on each other whether out of genuine concern or vindictive malice because they hear or see things (possibly out of context) and assume a child is being slapped around? Will kids realise the level of power this gives them and make false accusations against foster parents (for example) because they resent being in a foster home or resent a step parent. When it's an adult's word against a child's how do we know who to believe - will cameras need to be installed in homes, people to observe sent round? The whole thing is such a minefield - it is so important to safeguard vulnerable people, whether this is young people, the elderly or infirm or vulnerable adults. But I,m inclined to think a shifting of attitudes through more accessible, positive and proactive education for parents, carers and frontline staff and more support for mothers/fathers who dont have English as a first language, who have disabilities or health problems to contend with or who dont have a strong network.of family or friends to give them some relief is much more likely to be effective than legislation on its own.

I dont think those who harm their children in such a way to put them in such risk care to much about the law about it! I think it's quiet naive to believe that would stop children being abused.

Look at Sweden. It isn't about policing it or about stopping people giving a tap or criminalising them when they do. It is about making it socially unacceptable for adults to hit children and providing clear laws.

As long as it is legal it is sanctioned by the state and hard to draw the line between punishment and abuse.

It isn't naive it is based on evidence btw!!!

It is naive to believe that anything anyone does will completely stop adults abusing/killing children. This is not an achievable goal.

What laws outlawing corporal punishment do is prevent deaths from escalation of violence and by making it socially unacceptable for adults to hit children. That is the studied effect of a ban on corporal punishment and how it reduced child deaths in Sweden.

Is that due to the ban or is that due to the fact that their social services in that time have seemingly become much more supportive of families giving them support needed?

Fact is it is social acceptable, to many actively desirable, to hit children in this country as it was in Sweden before the ban.

Banning it did not increase or reduce antisocial behaviour in sweden indicating that although it may not increase antisocial behaviour across a general population, it is an ineffective method of discipline, research from Germany indicated that corporal punishment does increase the likelihood of antisocial behaviour in children with a certain gene I think but otherwise is ineffective. A ban changed social attitudes but did not result in criminalising of parents (or rampant wild children who held parents to ransom) as opponents worried it might. What it did do was drastically reduce child deaths at the hands of the parents.

These are the reasons the UN called on the UK to ban it outright in the children act, the uk govt refused without adequate explanation and various organisations are concerned about the lack of a ban on corporal punishment in the UK based on evidence from other countries who have banned it.

It is attributed to changes in social attitudes (I imagine also applying to social services) brought on by the ban.

They talk mostly about Sweden because they implemented a ban a long time ago and so have studied it awhile.

I'm on the fence about joined-up databases like this tbh. On one hand it would make things easier for DD2 (who has the same condition but a different presentation) as Mrs JREwing and TheHumanCatapult further back) so that new doctors in eg A&E have all her medical history to hand.

But, if it meant that when we turn up to A&E/Minor Injuries with a sprained foot or wrist or thumb to be checked out, the doctors there saw that the first consultant she saw suspected conversion disorder due to "deep rooted childhood trauma" (ie abuse of some kind), that would be the first thing they kept in mind, even though the psychiatrist she saw agreed that a lot of her difficulties were caused by that consultant ignoring the possibility of a (admittedly rare and unusual presentation) of an actual medical condition.

But then again (am getting splinters here ), we did see an A&E doctor who quite rightly had to do some CP checking because of the lead-up to that particular visit, but used his common sense, realised that the situation was more complex than it appeared on the surface, and called an urgent case conference of the doctors in the hospital who had been dealing with her, and most importantly, rang me to tell me the outcome. Still didn't make any progress with diagnosis or treatment there, but that's besides the point.

I think what I'm getting at, is agreeing that a database in itself isn't either a good or bad idea, it's how it's used by medical professionals, and how well trained they are.

durrant's report for save the children on the Swedish ban if you want to read. Longtime since I read it tbh, what I've read is what I remembered from this report and other things including my law module from 2011.

Once a doctor is convinced they have labelled you it very definitely affects the treatment you are able to get. Having been labelled with depression as a child (rather than the abuse I was suffering being recognised) I am still treated as hysterical, it even led to a HV refusing to help my twins with their physically based feeding problem because she was convinced I was just not looking after them properly because having had depression I was high risk for PND which I didn't have, she even threatened SS without checking their feeding/mouths. With my first because I was high risk for PND I was threatened by a midwife when I wanted to leave hospital the same day because "we wouldn't want you to not be able to cope would we?" They also failed to spot I was being abused by my partner even though he was threatening to punch the (lovely) midwife when I was in labour and me not being able to attend any midwife appointments in pg which may well have been connected to them ignoring my general cowed and downcast demeanour because doctors kept telling me I was depressed. I now don't think I ever was!

I agree with lots of posters, like Boffin and spero, and midnight who are saying the database is not a solution in its own right, its only as good as the data entries and the way its used.

And as i've said before, its the way 'facts' are recorded and used that seems to be the problem, not so much the facts themselves.

I (like others on here) would be worried about inaccurate assumptions and opinions being given weight by being turned into 'facts' by entering into a data base - the computer says yes type of thinking that already exists will continue to be a problem no matter how many databases are created... unless people themselves are trained and are capable of doing a good and nuanced job. That means giving them training, and time in which to make good decisions as professionals, not a tick box culture where no one is accountable and everything is blurry and confused.

For example, I am currently in a complaints procedure with Adult social services as through their incompetence, thoughtlessness and pressure from their managers, they have labelled me as having severe behavioural issues, and cognitive problems, and have called by child 'at risk of neglect'. Insert hollow laugh here. They have never even ever met my child, adult or children's services, and has no reason (really, none), to suspect my child is being neglected. But why i hear you cry? surely no smoke without fire etc etc etc... Oh i wish i still thought like that!

Actually what has happened is that i have become physically disabled, and the adult social worker was told by her boss that she 'must' ensure my funding for my care (nowt to do with my child) is transferred to the NHS, rather than social services... so they fabricated a whole form with the view that it would be good for me as i would get more funding, but they needed to tick 2 A boxes in the form, so picked Cognition and Behaviour. So although I am a senior manager in an international company, with a first class degree, etc etc etc, they have written down that i have substantial behavioural problems, cognition problems and an example of how physically ill i am is that IF i fell, and had no one to help me, my child might be neglected. They also said among other things that i am terminally ill, and have episodes of unconsciousness (wow, my consultants must be alerted to the new diagnosis immediately, a lifetime of study is wiped away by one social worker who can't even spell the condition correctly!).

Adult social services are terribly shocked and upset that i have complained formally and said 'they didn't mean to' say what they have said, and I'm sure they genuinely didn't think about the consequences of calling my child a legal term of at risk, which is not in their remit to even start talking about let alone that its ridiculous! I'm yet to hear back formally from them and I'm sure they will be covering up and sliding out of things as is usual. However as i took legal advice, and have a lawyer very keen to take it further - as its so clear cut gross incompetence and libellous, i will fight this and get it wiped from my records... although its making me more ill to do this.

anyway, the point being, this is currently 'on my records', and so the paper trail begins which can rapidly turn into a self fulfilling prophecy, as once one person has understood the gross inaccuracies to be 'fact', they generate more paperwork, which more people equate to evidence etc. I can well see how even in a case like mine, which is laughably incompetent and disgusting, if I hadn't picked up on it (they tried to push it through without my consent, giving to the other department saying it had been signed off my myself!), but if i hadn't challenged it, paperwork becomes fact very very quickly.

so, i know this is yet more anecdotal stories, BUT the systemic incompetence, ignorance of legislation protecting children's rights, the strange blurring of opinion, supposition and untruths with 'fact'... well, a database won't help with that will it!?

i am not against a database per se, i just think its a misuse of resources when the real problem isn't the data, its people!

and also, hey Mrsjrewing you remembered me :) how are you keeping? glad you've sorted out the schools horrendousness, its so hard to keep fighting and keep your head above water isn't it.

I found a temporary PA who is amazing, and although she can only help short term, we've agreed it will be part of her job to help me recruit and train a permanent person. so much better than before christmas when I was really struggling to keep going. but now i have to divert my energy into fighting ss again (see above post), when comes the time when i get to focus on just living? sigh. i really didn't want to do any more fighting.

In similar position to MrsJR (same disorder?) and have been falsely suspected of abuse though it never went as far as a court case.

The thing that really worried me was that once the consultant had settled on this explanation he refused to carry out further medical tests, despite his junior pleading with him to do so (I was earwigging).

This worried me more than the risk of having dd taken away. It seems clear in retrospect that he did do some physical harm to dd by forcing her to push against the pain which apparently is very bad for children with her condition. He also did her a great deal of emotional harm by insisting that her pain was all in her head: years later, dd still struggles with the fear of not knowing whether pain is real or not.

Better training in genetic disorders and in simple tests to diagnose them should go hand in hand with any safe-guarding measures. It is not because parents with disabled children don't want them safe-guarded, but simply because they recognise that a child who is forced through physically damaging treatment is not being safe-guarded, any more than a child who is left with abusive parents. What happened to dd was also a form of physical abuse.

cory poor your dd, I too have MrsJREwing's condition - amazing how we have all found ourselves on this thread! Or not so amazing considering the condition I guess.

i have to say poor your dd :( me & my sister got told all our lives we didn't feel what we really did feel, & I well know the physical & psychological toll it takes. I hope your dd is young enough & has good family support to start recognizing what her body is telling her.

I think that what many are saying is that by its very nature, a centralized system forces box ticking and conventional analysis. This means that children with rare and unconventional diseases (and children being abused in non-conventional ways) will be at higher risk of getting miscategorized because the system requires them to be fit into one of the provided (ie conventional) categories of the centralized (streamlined) system. I (and it seems like many other parents) don't trust the government to come up with a centralized system that can appropriately deal with unusual, rare or unconventional diseases, symptoms or situations. And personally I am wary of any system that limits in any way my ability to operate unconventionally as in my experience, my unconventional behavior has been the only way of obtaining appropriate medical care for my child.

I got taken to the gp aged 4 with a dislocating collar bone... He said it was nothing & me attention seeking, and so it began. I am fighting a cascade of problems that oh guess what, all stem from my dislocating collarbone. From shoulder to upper back to lower back to hips, ankles, elbows, wrists etc...

Probably nowadays would kick off a CP enquiry. Neither would lead to a diagnosis.

Sorry slight diversion of thread.

In a slightly different vein 15.5 years ago I went into labour at 27 weeks. When my waters broke I went straight to a flagship London teaching hospital. I had to explain DH was in court and the judge would not release him until court ended at 4 - possibly earlier if business ended sooner. The snr midwife came to see me and sympathised and empathised that my life was stressful and I agreed it was when DH was fighting a big case. Just before I enetered established labour DH's clerk called to see how the land lay. She came back and tore me off a strip because the hospital had been worried about me and she was on thje point of calling support agencies. My hospital notes clearly noted DH's occupation - barrister. DH arrived just before our son died. We were too distessed to make a formal complaint. No I do not think peoplewho do not red notes. Listen or apply any logic should be allowed to enter ant details whatsoever into databases. It is the antithesis of the experiences of many but if that could happen to us, my God what idiocy could affect more vulnerable people. It's very very scary.