Genuine question for those who follow a religion or school of thought where "conventional" medicine is not used

[BooHooo]

Hope that thread title makes sense. I would like to know how closely people stick to the "no to medical intervention" theory if it's what they believe in. albeit in a religious or parenting choice.

I was discussing ear infections with a good friend of mine. It was awful for DD and she was literally screaming in pain, refusing to be touched, really hight temp etc. I couldn't get the AB quick enough and it was a massive relief within 48 hrs to be so much better.

My friend agreed with how painful it was for her DS, but said she strapped a garlic clove to the back of his ear which she believed burned away the infection. I kept asking her how he was doing and she never responded. When he was well I asked again and again if she used AB but she never replied. I really wonder if she could have sat that through something so distressing just using these natural methods and would love to know if anyone eschews reguar Drs and if it works for them and their child/ren.

I speak as someone who really dislikes the idea of pumping babies full of meds but I feel where there is a nasty infection I have no choice whatsoever. DD is ill all the time and I feel AB sometimes contribute to her getting run down.

I've got a cousin who, due to an untreated ear infection, is now deaf and has learning difficulties. Please don't underestimate the importance of medical treatment where neccesary.

As a GP I think that people who choose not to use conventional medicine are crazy. OK, maybe people can be sceptical about new drugs and developments, but the use of antibiotics for common infections is well researched and well established.

I think if adults want to make these crazy choices then it's up to them, but to impose their illogical views on children is cruel.

As you say, watching your child suffer is unbearable, and most parents would do anything to ease their child's pain.

without modern medicine my whole family would be dead. Father pneumonia, mother cancer, me Blood disorder, brother and sister chicken pox and measles (OK so they might not have died but wouldn't have existed anyway as Ma and Pa would not have lived to have them).

My grandfatehr was deaf in one ear from childhood ear infection.

I suspect that many people who don't "beleive" in modern medicine have never ahd a close family member saved by it.

I do agree that we are too quick to resort to antibiotics but I have noticed a change in this over the past couple of years. People do seem to be grasping that AB's don't work on things like colds!

To the OP - really shocked that someone might not treat their child because of religion or school of thought, in some ways I think this should be classified as child abuse if the child ends up deaf as a result of unteated ear infection....but I think there sometimes a place for alternative medicine, clearly NOT when your child is in pain, or with any condition that could give rise to long term complication eg untreated ear infection.

I have an underactive thyroid and if it wasn't for modern medicine I'd be an exhausted wreck the whole time and I wouldn't have been able to have any children. However I also have PCOS and I have managed to "treat" this via diet, weight control, exercise etc and have not needed to resort to medication.

I dread the thought if DD has been born 60 yrs ago before penecillin, she would be gone . I feel so lucky to have these treatments but rely on alternative therapies to deal with other non threatening conditions like skin problems, stomach pains etc.

I suspect the people I refer to in my OP are few and far between, judging by the response on here..I may just have odd friends...

Do you mean people who decide not to have blood transfusions etc for religious reasons? Does anyone know if a parent can prevent a doctor from giving their child a blood transfusion if it's against their religion but the doctor thinks the child would die without it? I wouldn't expect a case like this to come up I just wonder what would happen.

THere have been cases i can recall where drs have gone to court so that a child can have a trabsfusion/operation against teh wishes of teh parent.

BooHoo, was the parent so fond of garlic involved in a particular alternative school that begins with an 'S'?

I use to know many parents like this, more worrying was that vaccinations were actively discouraged so any illness a child may encounter would enable them to fulfill their 'karmic destiny'

There are some extreme Christian sects who refuse treatment on relgious grounds.

There have been cases of children dying in agony from untreated tumours and metabolic disorders.

I could be mixed up but I think there was a case of a child dying of untreated diabeties recently. What an awful way to die.

I respect strong faith but I cannot find a way of understanding how a parent would be able to watch a child screaming in pain and do nothing but pray.

My DD suffered indescribable pain due to her bone marrow expanding. The sight and sound haunts me today. How could a parent watch that and do nothing?

I have had some very interesting and civil discussions with JWs on Mumsnet. I have an obvious interest in their views on blood transfusions due to DD's illness. They were kind enough to share their ideals with me. On another forum I have been told I am a bad and wicked mother for allowing my child to be given blood and I have condemed her and myself forever.

Teddy - yes they can but I think in that case the hospital can go to court.

As she didn't evangelise all over the place about the effectiveness of the garlic clove, it's a safe bet that she eventually took her child to the GP and got a righteous arse reaming for being so fucking neglectful in the first place - hence, she will not discuss it because she's embarrassed.

TBH treating minor infections and injuries with woo and bollocks is no big deal (because minor infections and injuries will get better anyway and most over the counter medications are not that effective either). Treating your DC's serious illness and serious injury with woo and bollocks is vile stupid behaviour. (DO what you like with your own body. IF you are fucking mental enough to think that the Power of Prayer will sort out peritonitis or a severed limb then go ahead and demonstrate Darwinism in action).

Teddy in the case of someone refusing blood transfusion etc the dr's would go to court to gain the necessary authority. So essentially it's a bit of a cop out on the part of the parents, because they know they will never actually have to go through with refusing treatment for their child because the courts will take over and make the decision for them.

It's easy to stand by your beliefs when you know you won't have to prove them.

My personal opinion is that anyone who refuses life-saving treatment for their children is guilty of child abuse and should be charged as such.

I think choosing not to vaccinate is different because when you vaccinate you are only potentially preventing an illness which may or may not occur, and which in many cases may not be life-threatening and will result in life-long immunity anyway. Most children who develop measles, or mumps for eg will not die or even be severely affected, I imagine that many children who have not been vaccinated will not go on to develop the illnesses at all. Whereas refusing a child a blood transfusion would almost certainly result in death.

Yes I suspect this too coldtits as she went v quiet on me. I was very open about the medicine DD has had to ingest. I don't like it but it will save her life and pain, no brainer.

Yes she is enrolling in a "S" school when her DS is of age Runny, I hear that is part of the cultural norm there.

I am curious as to how they deal with Drs diagnosis' and would feel very worried if there couldn't be some kind of intervention by law, but what a grey area that must be. Presumably it would only be if the illness was life threatening, but primary infections in infants can so often be fatal when they develop into a more serious one can't they? It is baffling how they must reason this.

I would genuinely like to hear from a parent who feels this way and what the limitations were. Thankfully it must be pretty rare...

Yes, I do not feel that opting out of vaccinations are the same kettle of fish. Although this choice can be made through misleading information, it is not the same as actively denying treatment.

I might be the sort of person you mean.

I am not rabidly anti-medical-intervention and would take DD(6) to the doctor's if I ever felt it was necessary - she fell and cut her nose badly a couple of years ago and I took her straight to A&E to get it looked at and steri-stripped together by someone less cackhanded than myself.

But beyond that she has never been to the GP in her life, has had no vaccinations, and has never been given any medication. Actually now I think about it she had calpol once but spat it out immediately and refused another dose, so I think it probably doesn't count.

I don't have much truck with complementary medicine either though, beyond honey and lemon drinks for sore throats.

She is ill sometimes (the usual coughs, colds, chickenpox, very rare D&V bug), and I look after her at home. There have been a couple of times when I have thought, if she is still like this in the morning she is going to the doctor, but it has never actually been necessary.

I think a big part of it is that I don't worry about high temperatures much. I can recognise one in DD, but in itself it doesn't worry me and I think its an important part of a healthy immune response, and that unless it becomes so high as to cause danger to the child it should be left to run its course and not be brought down artificially. We don't have a thermometer and so I rely on watching DD's condition carefully to tell me how she is.

There have been times when her friends have been taken to the GP when I wouldn't have thought it necessary, and come away with antibiotics or whatever, but interestingly they dont seem to recover any faster than DD would. Maybe we are just lucky and she is very robust.

Boohoo, sadly reason has very little place in the movement concerned, plus it depends how deeply involved the parents are in following the belief system.

Many don't register with a GP as the schools have their own anthroposophical doctor and with this comes their own spiritual interpretation of illness

Did your friend have a S education or has she fallen in love with the idea of S?

I don't think QOFEisinatizz you sound like at all that sort of person, since I'm sure you'd seek medical help if needed and sound very sensible - as well as fortunate not to have needed to so far. I wonder about your reluctance re vaccination though. Is there a reason you don't want your dd vaccinated?

QOFEisinatizz - around a month ago my DD(6) had an infected finger - tried some home remedies ie trying to squeeze out pus / dip in salty water etc. But it just got worse, and annoyingly had wait 2 days for GP appointment - on day we finally went DD crying it was so painful.

It cleared up within 1 day on antibiotics.... is this the sort of thing you'd go to GP over? If so you wouldn't seem like the sort of person the OP was referring to.

re: vacinations, I guess you are relying on herd immunity - ie that everyone else gets vaccinated.

"It's easy to stand by your beliefs when you know you won't have to prove them"
but they do refuse blood for themselves, just legally know that Dr will do what they want when a child is under 18years old, as we have seen in past with other treatments other than blood.

Im not a fond lover of meds for me, but will give my children what GP suggests

people have lots of different reasons for choosing not to vaccinate though.

Some people do have the fear of vaccine damage (which for some can be a real possibility if autoimmune disorders exist within a family), some people believe that it is better to catch certain illnesses and build immunity that way rather than vaccinating, some people may vaccinate against some illnesses but not others...

My own ds has been vaccinated against most childhood illnesses ie mmr/baby jabs etc, but I do often wonder whether we are overloading young children with vaccinations when they are still very tiny.

I certainly would never have considered vaccinating against chicken pox, and yet a vaccine does exist.

I haven't vaccinated him against swine flu and have no intentions of doing so because I personally believe it would be better to catch it and build immunity that way. I wouldn't vaccinate him against seasonal flu so don't see why sf is any different.

I don't think that with everyone it's about herd immunity so much as that some illnesses aren't as bad as others. I didn't vaccinate against chicken pox because cp is a mild illness and it's better to catch it (which he did earlier this year) but something like polio would be a different matter for instance..

I'd just like to point out that garlic is a natural antibiotic, so the parents may not be as loopy as they may seem.

Though if they're S people, that puts a different slant on it.

But strapping a whole colve behind a child's ear? Like some sort of hearing aid?

Loopers.

OLKN: Ok if it's remotely effective it would need to be either ingested or directly applied - I could accept that it would be as useful an emregcency antiseptic as piss or vodka (both of which are feasible to use when you get a minor cut or scrape somewhere miles from the nearest Superdrug) but for a serious problem? No.

Yeah, I know, I was just wondering if there could have been any, at least vaguely rational answer. But no, strapping garlic to an ear won't help.