Would you be angry?

patchwork_cat

As the OP , Mojisola has hit the nail on the head - this could have been about a recurring sprained ankle for example.

coolcait

I do feel that the friend's mum was on to a loser whatever she did.

If she had treated the girl's pain as 'just period pain', she could be criticised for being negligent. If she had taken her to A&E, she would have been accused of over-reacting.

She chose the middle path of taking the girl to the doctor, and has been accused of over-stepping the mark, and criticised for not informing the mum. Or, put another way, criticised for not worrying the mum unnecessarily. If the doctor had given a different diagnosis, and she still hadn't informed the mum, then I'd see far greater grounds for criticism.

There's an assumption that the mum was contactable. Mobiles can run out of charge, be switched off, or be in 'dead spots' for coverage.

She was in the same country, but how far away was she in terms of travel time? I've been on a thread where I've pointed out that all of the parties involved are in the same country - but other posters have pointed out the length of time involved in travelling.

Unless she regularly dumps her daughter on someone else to go off gallivanting, then there's a good chance that this was a very special trip away for her. And so neither her daughter nor her friend mum wanted to spoil it, unless absolutely necessary.

So, the friend's mum took the girl to the doctor, and was re-assured that the girl's pain was just due to her period.

Why then would she have to disturb the mum on her holiday to let her know that there was no reason to worry?

And why is the OP so angry about something which hasn't angered the mum?

Maybe there's a more constructive way to help the mum deal with her guilt than vilifying the only person who has actually bothered to take the child to see the doctor about this pain.

Torry_Quine

Unless an emergency situation there is no way that she should have taken her to the doctor without at least contacting the mother. That would be the same whatever the problem was.

I remember as a teenager going to the doctor as I was ill every month to the extent I was actually being sick. I was horrified that he suggested putting me on the pill without even trying anything else. His comment that I would need it for protection soon enough was I felt not approppriate and I told him in no uncertain terms that I would not be going on the pill. Other things including painkillers and anti-emetics worked.

Children should not be given such powerful hormones unless absolutley essential and all other approaches have been tried

peachyprice

coolcait wrote: »

TThe big trigger, however, seems to be that the girl was prescribed the pill .

No, not at all. To me the fact that this woman decided a medical intervention was needed without having the decency to phone the mother to tell her so is disgraceful , not what was prescribed.

coolcait

peachyprice wrote: »

No, not at all. To me the fact that this woman decided a medical intervention was needed without having the decency to phone the mother to tell her so is disgraceful , not what was prescribed.

Maybe that's why I'm not reacting in the same way as so many others.

I don't see a visit to the doctor's as "a medical intervention"

I see it as a means to identify whether or not there is really a problem to worry about. Or one which means that an absent parent needs to be informed (allowing them to worry also).

In this case, the doctor diagnosed that the girl did indeed suffer terrible period pains. Something which the mother was aware of already. But apparently failed to inform the weekend carer about.

A hysterectomy, on the other hand, is an example of "a medical intervention" in my view.

Since I'm in "in for a penny, in for a pound" I'll also confess that I can't abide the phrase "the doctor put so and so on the pill". It makes it sound like there's no alternative but to take the damn thing.

It's a prescription like any other. You can choose to go to the chemist and fill the prescription. Or not. You can choose to take the medication. Or not.

A doctor may prescribe the pill. The individual will not go on the pill unless they (are allowed to) choose to do so.

Edwardia

I can't believe the amount of fuss over the pill, it's like reading something out of the sixties.

Teenager had bad period pains. If this had never happened before the teenager was probably distressed and the other mother did right thing by taking her to doctor - most likely teenager's own doctor.

If it had happened before, teenager's mother should have prepared the other mother. Also, if it had happened before, don't understand why the teenager's mother or any mother for that matter would let her daughter be in pain because she didn't want daughter on oral contraceptives at fourteen.

I had irregular periods and acne as teenager, I went to see GP and got the pill. Didn't make any difference to when/how I lost my virginity. Since I was being allowed to see GP by myself then as far as I was concerned the details were between me and him.

So maybe the teenager wanted the pill for her periods, well there's nothing wrong in that. Her own GP would know her family history if there were big probs, may have known her since she was a kid. Very much doubt that the pill was dished out by the other mother's GP.

I think the mother is the one in the wrong either for not sorting out daughter's painful periods and warning the other mother or getting nose out of joint because the other mother took teenager to GP.

Ultimately the GP took the decision to give the teenager the pill not the other mother.

lolavix

I really don't see the big deal - there could be any number of reasons why the mum wasn't called.

I went on the pill at 13 for heavy periods and I never told my mum - as far as I was concerned, it was nothing to do with her. The doctor prescribed it and it worked - end of problem.

BekahC

I think until the question is answered (if it had been answered before I must have missed it, sorry) whether the woman went in to the consultation or not no one can possibly judge whether she has or has not done something wrong!

Mojisola

BekahC wrote: »

I think until the question is answered (if it had been answered before I must have missed it, sorry) whether the woman went in to the consultation or not no one can possibly judge whether she has or has not done something wrong!

I don't see why that's important at all. If a child in your care needs medical attention you should contact the parents so that they know about it.

BekahC

Mojisola wrote: »

I don't see why that's important at all. If a child in your care needs medical attention you should contact the parents so that they know about it.

I didnt say that she shouldn't. A lot of people have ignored that point are blaming her for the Teenager getting the pill.

I must admit, at the same age - I asked a family friend to take me to a doctor for a similar reason, she didnt tell my mum as I asked her not too. BUT my mum was not upset after because at least I felt comfortable enough to talk to someone. My point is without all the details and as someone else said talking to the 3 people involved directly - we will not know the exact circumstance! I believe it was said the mother was upset but not angry about this, a lot of people wouldnt be upset.

I guess it is person preference, I know I would rather my kids have an adult around that cares enough to do something like that, even if I wasnt told at the time. Its not as if she was hiding a broken leg!
I dont mean to sound snappy if I do, in a bit of pain at the moment lol sorry xx