Mothers alcohol use shown on medical records

[RegularHumanBartender]

I have just stumbled across this on the Sky news homepage and I am horrified. I have no words! Apologies if there is already a thread, I did scan the first page but I couldn't see one.

Talk about reducing women to sacred incubators! I am struggling to form sentences I am so incensed by this. Not sure if this is even the right place to post.

news.sky.com/story/mothers-alcohol-use-could-soon-be-shown-on-childs-medical-record-prompting-privacy-fears-12073153

Langdown thank you. The other HCPs on the thread have seen no issues. That really is troubling.

There's also no answer that I can see about the potential consequences of having this info on file to be read by the child.

Nicegerbil we never really know if anyone is who they claim to be online do we? (I realise that also applies to me too).

I actually think most professionals would be concerned by this. They understand the consequences if patients can't trust their information is confidential.

Risk always outweighs confidentiality. Perinatal mental health services have to manage these dilemmas all the time. It would be interesting if any MH nurses working in perinatal shared their experience as I'm coming at it from the perspective of someone asked to help the potentially brain damaged middle aged adult children.

Alcohol is the drug that kills the most people in the UK, hopitalises the most people in the UK, and is responsible for more ill than all of the rest of the drugs available combined. Only cigarettes are any kind of rival. I chose not to ingest alcohol throughout my pregnancy, because it is common knowledge that even ONE glass has the potential to harm unborn children. Doctor's and other care givers may need this information to protect both the mother and child.

Risk always outweighs confidentiality.

It does, but only in very specific situations and then only on a case-by-case basis.

It's not my area of expertise, but from memory, when confidentiality is breached say for safeguarding purposes, the organisation has to record why they have breached GDPR and could be held to account for their decision.

Routinely transferring maternal information into child records is a very different scenario and we should not be blasé about it.

I'm still not clear from this discussion that it is definitely happening, but if it is, then an almighty stink needs to be kicked up.

I'll get my DMs ready.

@dadshere

Alcohol is the drug that kills the most people in the UK, hopitalises the most people in the UK, and is responsible for more ill than all of the rest of the drugs available combined. Only cigarettes are any kind of rival. I chose not to ingest alcohol throughout my pregnancy, because it is common knowledge that even ONE glass has the potential to harm unborn children. Doctor's and other care givers may need this information to protect both the mother and child.

A single glass of alcohol during 40 weeks of pregnancy has not been shown to be harmful.

There is no evidence as to what would be a safe amount because it would be unethical to do the research. Because of this, women are advised to avoid alcohol completely.

To be clear, FAS doesn't happen to the children of women who had a small spritzer with their xmas dinner.

I hope no one minds, but I have started a discussion in legal to ask if anyone would like to input into this thread.

Can I ask for some legal brains to input on an issue about confidentiality? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/legal_matters/4027786-can-i-ask-for-some-legal-brains-to-input-on-an-issue-about-confidentiality

Risk always outweighs confidentiality

Is there more to this principle, because that’s not true in a whole host of situations where men’s medical records are involved - genetic diseases that may be passed down, STDs that may be passed on, etc.

'Risk always outweighs confidentiality.'

This is rubbish.

I can think of loads of examples where it doesn't.

Also, what of the risk to women of this info being available to their children?

To elaborate; "risk" in my profession is a catch all for many types of risk, inc risk of harm to all persons involved. In the context of this thread it would be weighing up harm to unborn child and harm to self, harm from others etc on the basis of the information available at that time and best practice guidance from the midwifery council, GMC and RCN.

Alcohol is the drug that kills the most people in the UK, hopitalises the most people in the UK, and is responsible for more ill than all of the rest of the drugs available combined. Only cigarettes are any kind of rival. I chose not to ingest alcohol throughout my pregnancy, because it is common knowledge that even ONE glass has the potential to harm unborn children. Doctor's and other care givers may need this information to protect both the mother and child

This isnt only about alcohol, in fact it's not about alcohol except tangentially. It's all the other things that one person decides is important enough to also go on the child's records. From self harm, drugs, alcohol, depression and how many live/dead children the mother had. So if I had a child adopted for any reason and never told my child/ren living with me, at age 16 they could find this out. Surely this is up to the mother to tell or not tell.
And then the audacity to not do the same for the fathers.
Its infuriating. More so because it's down to a random HCP. If they think it's not worth reporting,then it's not reported. This is a ridiculous state.
Even getting permission to me is a minefield. I would have agreed when younger, now I know more (and am too old to have any more children) i would never agree.

I think one of the points that perhaps isn’t being made clear here is that maternal information such as drug/alcohol use, DV concerns, police or SS involvement will only be recorded if there are relevant concerns. And any information that is recorded would likely be redacted if notes were accessed by the person/parent as they identify another person. In practice this might not happen I have no experience of that so don’t know.

I'm sure a lot of non relevant information would get redacted...
As I said earlier a perinatal MH nurse would know the facts here more than me though. When I have been asked to prepare documents I have followed guidance in what to redact.

Hatgirl has helpfully posted a full explanation on the thread I started in legal.

As I suspected, some of the posters on this thread have been misleading us.

To use the phrase of the week, information is only shared on a limited and specific basis. And only relevant information from maternal records is included in child records.

It would appear that the lady of the lamp had had her candle blown up.

@Al1Langdownthecleghole I have not been misleading. In my profession I regularly read reports that contain family history information in most of the categories mentioned on here.

Maternal health and family circumstances make up a child’s history. That is a fact. This information may be recorded in a child’s notes where relevant. Also a fact. Alcohol, drug use, number of siblings and pregnancies are all information that can be recorded if relevant and cause for concern. Fact.

If there is a specific “claim” I’ve made that is incorrect I’d love you to highlight it. This thread was to share information which I have done honestly and with professional experience.

If this is a case where mother's medical records confidentiality is compromised but father's are not, I can see where the possible outrage is coming from. However in the name of health outcomes for children being improved the solution is to ensure relevant data from father's medical records being included.

will only be recorded if there are relevant concerns. And any information that is recorded would likely be redacted if notes were accessed by the person/parent as they identify another person. In practice this might not happen I have no experience of that so don’t know

Who decides what's relevant? What are the criteria?
I'm not certain about this because lots of my notes are missing, but I can access what there is online, any time I want. How can it be redacted if I can access whenever, it's even more likely that people born after 2000? Can access notes whenever. Cant redact live notes.

It's deeply fucking sinister. I'm 37 weeks. I've had the odd glass of wine or half of lager over the past 9 months. Like fuck would I tell a doctor or midwife this if it was being recorded. Leave us the hell alone.

@AntiSocialInjusticePacifist in an earlier post I explained how the fathers information is recorded (in my area and ime) but basically fathers circumstances tend to be recorded as social history (if at all) unless there are significant health issues disclosed such as BBVs or hereditary conditions. Ime this is due to a lack of evidence that fathers health is as relevant to a baby as mothers is.

@roarfeckingroarr that’s not drinking to excess or putting your child at risk. The difference is trying to identify babies at risk of FAS and reducing those risks where possible.

And it’s not treating women as “incubators” as pp have suggested. If a woman is continuing a pregnancy then HCPs are obliged to try to support her to do so in a way that minimises risk to her and the baby.

@roarfeckingroarr

It's deeply fucking sinister. I'm 37 weeks. I've had the odd glass of wine or half of lager over the past 9 months. Like fuck would I tell a doctor or midwife this if it was being recorded. Leave us the hell alone.

This is to identify women who are using alcohol/drugs to a point it would endanger their child. The vast majority of pregnant woman are of sound mind and want their children to be healthy, the rights of children should definitely come first, if a women is so abused that she is dependent on substances then she shouldn't be having children at all as much for her sake and the poor kids too

[quote FlorenceNightshade]@roarfeckingroarr that’s not drinking to excess or putting your child at risk. The difference is trying to identify babies at risk of FAS and reducing those risks where possible.

And it’s not treating women as “incubators” as pp have suggested. If a woman is continuing a pregnancy then HCPs are obliged to try to support her to do so in a way that minimises risk to her and the baby.[/quote]
From the article that started this thread, linked in a nice clicky link in the OP:

"The record would show if a mother even had a single glass of alcohol"

@BoomBoomsCousin even if a single glass of alcohol was consumed and recorded in mother’s notes it would never be actioned by a HCP as it’s not going to cause FAS.

[quote FlorenceNightshade]@BoomBoomsCousin even if a single glass of alcohol was consumed and recorded in mother’s notes it would never be actioned by a HCP as it’s not going to cause FAS.[/quote]
Read the fucking article FlorenceNightshade.

They are talking about recording the single glass of alcohol that the MOTHER drinks on the CHILD's medical records.

@BoomBoomsCousin I’m aware of the content. What I’m saying is that in the real world that information would never be acted on if it wasn’t going to cause significant risk of harm. It’s data that would be collected but not used unless it became relevant