ChatterBank1 min ago
Doctors make me quite mad!
16 Answers
I have my son home again who has been ill since last Wed with a sore, red throat and ear with very high temp!
So what do i do (obviously) did the three day rule and dosed him up with calpol etc...
Took him to doctors on Fridau and low and behold he has a throat infection but isn't going to get antibiotics as the doc thought it best he fights it himself. (This i'm told time and time again on other occasions)
My son has hardly had antibiotics, so he's hardly a slave to them! The poor child is in such pain now! I'm taking him back!
It just seems that this happens all the time and I either end up taking him back and having antibiotics anyway (but had a painful few days of worrying) or going to primecare in the middle of the night for care!
My question is really about prevention. If docts would treat the sick, wouldn't this not cut down on the number of out of hours care we need?
I know the Gov has set targets on reducing antibiotics, but to a 3 year old childs expence who is very upset and ill???????
So what do i do (obviously) did the three day rule and dosed him up with calpol etc...
Took him to doctors on Fridau and low and behold he has a throat infection but isn't going to get antibiotics as the doc thought it best he fights it himself. (This i'm told time and time again on other occasions)
My son has hardly had antibiotics, so he's hardly a slave to them! The poor child is in such pain now! I'm taking him back!
It just seems that this happens all the time and I either end up taking him back and having antibiotics anyway (but had a painful few days of worrying) or going to primecare in the middle of the night for care!
My question is really about prevention. If docts would treat the sick, wouldn't this not cut down on the number of out of hours care we need?
I know the Gov has set targets on reducing antibiotics, but to a 3 year old childs expence who is very upset and ill???????
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by andrea81. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You do indeed have my sympathy, as most sore throats are indeed viral and hence do not respond to antiobiotics. HOWEVER, bacterial infection do occur regularly and streptococcal infections can be dangerous. One cannot look at an infected throat and say for sure whether or not it is bacterial or viral. In your case I feel that it would have been prudent to have given your son antibiotics.
Update!
Just got back from the Docs and he now has Penicillin! It was quite annoying still as it was a new doctor who said all the things about him fighting it off himself blah blah (which a lot of the time I understand, to which I always give a bit of time before going to docs).
But hoorey! His high temp, puss and inflated glands the size of plums prevailed!
Cheers x x x x x
Just got back from the Docs and he now has Penicillin! It was quite annoying still as it was a new doctor who said all the things about him fighting it off himself blah blah (which a lot of the time I understand, to which I always give a bit of time before going to docs).
But hoorey! His high temp, puss and inflated glands the size of plums prevailed!
Cheers x x x x x
Hope your son soon feels much better andrea. The problem is, we're using far too many antibiotics these days, when sometimes we should rely on the body's natural defence system, but as in your son's case, there comes a time when doctors should use their common sense and prescribe a course of them. Glad he got sorted out.
I'm not going to defend GPs (I hardly feel the need and in any case judging by some of the responses I would assume that it would be fruitles).
Suffice to say have any of you ever heard this before:
'how long will it take to be cured doctor?' a week if I treat it and 7 days if I don't
In an ideal world if there was evidence of a suppurative bacterial infection then a sample would be taken for culture and sensitivity and an appropriate (sepcific) antibiotic would be administered.
However sadly we do not live in an ideal world so broad spectrum antibiotics are used instead.
They are also used inappropriately (and have been for a long time) this has increased the rate at which bacterial organims become antiobitic resistant hence MRSA.
Antibiotics are effective against infections of bacterial origin THEY DO NOT WORK for infections of viral or fungal origin.
Suffice to say have any of you ever heard this before:
'how long will it take to be cured doctor?' a week if I treat it and 7 days if I don't
In an ideal world if there was evidence of a suppurative bacterial infection then a sample would be taken for culture and sensitivity and an appropriate (sepcific) antibiotic would be administered.
However sadly we do not live in an ideal world so broad spectrum antibiotics are used instead.
They are also used inappropriately (and have been for a long time) this has increased the rate at which bacterial organims become antiobitic resistant hence MRSA.
Antibiotics are effective against infections of bacterial origin THEY DO NOT WORK for infections of viral or fungal origin.
It sounds as though in yours son's case that there was indeed at least the suggestion of bacterial aetiology giving rise to his symptoms (at least I hope there was!!!) although there may not have been on initial presentation.
I appreciate fully why you are upset and If I was in your position I might feel the same way.
However why not indulge me now and attempt to see things from the clinicians point of view (something we all find difficult which is the main reason for misunderstanding and conflict).
**Incidentally the prophylactic use of antibiotics without clinical indication is inappropriate, highly dangerous and expensive****
- given that you attended understandbly upset to the GP with your young son obviously unwell requesting antibiotics, the easiest thing for the GP to have done would have been to precribe antibiotics
- however since the GP obviously felt that there was no indication for doing so it would have been inappropriate.
- antibiotics can give rise to anaphylaxis and unfortuantely in some cases death
- overuse has led to resistant strains of bacteria which can give rise to fatal infections
- most throat infections are a result of viral infections and are self limiting
- in a child as young as three, low level exposure to pathogens will boost the immune response/system for subsequent more serious infections
- most courses of antibiotics are 5-7 days
- therefore in the past patients have attributed the resolution of their symptoms to the use of antibiotics when in fact they have had no therapeutic effect
- In fact your son's symptoms may resolve within the course of antibiotics (or just after) how can you be certain that they have had any positive effect? ...You can't
I appreciate fully why you are upset and If I was in your position I might feel the same way.
However why not indulge me now and attempt to see things from the clinicians point of view (something we all find difficult which is the main reason for misunderstanding and conflict).
**Incidentally the prophylactic use of antibiotics without clinical indication is inappropriate, highly dangerous and expensive****
- given that you attended understandbly upset to the GP with your young son obviously unwell requesting antibiotics, the easiest thing for the GP to have done would have been to precribe antibiotics
- however since the GP obviously felt that there was no indication for doing so it would have been inappropriate.
- antibiotics can give rise to anaphylaxis and unfortuantely in some cases death
- overuse has led to resistant strains of bacteria which can give rise to fatal infections
- most throat infections are a result of viral infections and are self limiting
- in a child as young as three, low level exposure to pathogens will boost the immune response/system for subsequent more serious infections
- most courses of antibiotics are 5-7 days
- therefore in the past patients have attributed the resolution of their symptoms to the use of antibiotics when in fact they have had no therapeutic effect
- In fact your son's symptoms may resolve within the course of antibiotics (or just after) how can you be certain that they have had any positive effect? ...You can't
Your initial post is quite a common complaint and one I appreciate, afterall its very distressing when your 3 year old is unwell and naturally you want someone to blame.
By the way GPs cannot prescribe for their own children so they would palliate the symptoms and monitor them closely if the symptoms persist/infection lasts for a protracted course then they would have to arrange an appointment at their childs GP.
The last comments about out of hours care are most interesting to me.
You mentioned the word 'need' the fact is there are very few reasons why a patient would 'need' to attend an out of hours GP service (a service which is abused).
- If its an acute medical emergency then its A&E or a minor injury unit
- If its a chronic problem, then usually your under the care of a GP (so you don't need out of hours)
- If its non urgent, then you don't need out of hours
- If its a chronic problem that becomes acute then its probably serious enough to require attention again at A&E
- There are only a few cases where it would be necessary for assessment and treatment at your GP out of hours (and obviously referral to secondary care)
- In any case the funding for this sort of service is changing rapidly, the goverment is currently under the process of forcing doctors to open out of hours for elective appointments (which in my oppinion there is no need for) at no extra cost to the tax payer/budget and I wouldn't be surprised if the next step wasn't to make GPs responsible for there own urgent out of hours services again.
By the way GPs cannot prescribe for their own children so they would palliate the symptoms and monitor them closely if the symptoms persist/infection lasts for a protracted course then they would have to arrange an appointment at their childs GP.
The last comments about out of hours care are most interesting to me.
You mentioned the word 'need' the fact is there are very few reasons why a patient would 'need' to attend an out of hours GP service (a service which is abused).
- If its an acute medical emergency then its A&E or a minor injury unit
- If its a chronic problem, then usually your under the care of a GP (so you don't need out of hours)
- If its non urgent, then you don't need out of hours
- If its a chronic problem that becomes acute then its probably serious enough to require attention again at A&E
- There are only a few cases where it would be necessary for assessment and treatment at your GP out of hours (and obviously referral to secondary care)
- In any case the funding for this sort of service is changing rapidly, the goverment is currently under the process of forcing doctors to open out of hours for elective appointments (which in my oppinion there is no need for) at no extra cost to the tax payer/budget and I wouldn't be surprised if the next step wasn't to make GPs responsible for there own urgent out of hours services again.
MrXLA
Waw - thats a lot for me to reply to but I'll give it a go!!!!
To begin with I appreciate what you are saying, honestly, I'm not a particularly paranoid mother. If my son is ill I'll usually give him at least 3 days of plenty of sleep, fluids and suspention to keep him feeling well before seeking advice i.e. NHS direct, pharmacy, THEN doctor!
If you were to see my sons records, he's 4 yrs in three weeks, but has only had antibiotics three times in his life. So I'm in no means a mother who demands (or requests as you put it) antibiotics.
I didn't ask for antibiotics, I went there in the hopes that the doc could see that he was not fighting it himself (as he clearly was worse after the weekend even with all the calpon and ibuprofen, ice lollies, tepid baths etc .....
So at some point, a child (who doesn't understand all the scientific reasons for not giving antibiotics) should be given a little help!
The last time he was NOT given antibiotics, we had to attend primecare (out of hours) the following day as suggested by NHS direct as he had a temp of 40'C and was vomiting!
So although I understand the reasons GP's have for not giving it. As a mother who knows when her son is just under the weather or is quite unwell, I think in this case, I was right!
Cheers all x x
Waw - thats a lot for me to reply to but I'll give it a go!!!!
To begin with I appreciate what you are saying, honestly, I'm not a particularly paranoid mother. If my son is ill I'll usually give him at least 3 days of plenty of sleep, fluids and suspention to keep him feeling well before seeking advice i.e. NHS direct, pharmacy, THEN doctor!
If you were to see my sons records, he's 4 yrs in three weeks, but has only had antibiotics three times in his life. So I'm in no means a mother who demands (or requests as you put it) antibiotics.
I didn't ask for antibiotics, I went there in the hopes that the doc could see that he was not fighting it himself (as he clearly was worse after the weekend even with all the calpon and ibuprofen, ice lollies, tepid baths etc .....
So at some point, a child (who doesn't understand all the scientific reasons for not giving antibiotics) should be given a little help!
The last time he was NOT given antibiotics, we had to attend primecare (out of hours) the following day as suggested by NHS direct as he had a temp of 40'C and was vomiting!
So although I understand the reasons GP's have for not giving it. As a mother who knows when her son is just under the weather or is quite unwell, I think in this case, I was right!
Cheers all x x
Well, you certainly asked for that MrXLA. Andrea asked a simple question in her penultimate paragraph and the answer was simple..yes, in thet case her son should have been given antibiotics..period.
You answer was well informed, well put together an accurate assessment of the Use and Abuse of Antibiotics which would have graced the Lancet or BMJ BUT, this is the AB read by people who have no idea what you are talking about and couldn't care less. Just click onto Body and Soul and see the stupid qestions that are asked. I have a sneaking feeling that your response was to Josie48 "rattling your cage" and I have a certain amount of sympathy for you, but I feel that you should have ignored comments like hers, particularly at 10.30 at night
You answer was well informed, well put together an accurate assessment of the Use and Abuse of Antibiotics which would have graced the Lancet or BMJ BUT, this is the AB read by people who have no idea what you are talking about and couldn't care less. Just click onto Body and Soul and see the stupid qestions that are asked. I have a sneaking feeling that your response was to Josie48 "rattling your cage" and I have a certain amount of sympathy for you, but I feel that you should have ignored comments like hers, particularly at 10.30 at night
but now youve scared off MrXLA who seems to know what he's talking about. it seems to me, that you really wanted a pat on the back for knowing 'whats best for my son' and ok, yes you did, you dont seem the hysterical type BUT you are emotionally attached to your son and MrXLA has answered from a perfectly reasonable objective point of view and i dont think you should lambast him for it.
mandimoo
I didn't think I had been rude. It seems to me that MrXLA
has a lot to say on the matter and maybe even wanted a pat on the back himself for being the font of knowledge on the matter!
And I think as a mother, I would agree... I am emotionally attached to my son!
After all, the point I was making was that a 3year old should have to be in that much pain - no matter what the 'scientific' reasons are!
But thanks for the pat on the back!!!!!!!!
I didn't think I had been rude. It seems to me that MrXLA
has a lot to say on the matter and maybe even wanted a pat on the back himself for being the font of knowledge on the matter!
And I think as a mother, I would agree... I am emotionally attached to my son!
After all, the point I was making was that a 3year old should have to be in that much pain - no matter what the 'scientific' reasons are!
But thanks for the pat on the back!!!!!!!!
Noone should have to be in pain, but antibiotics only give pain relief indirectly (thay have no analgesic properties) by expediating the resolution of an infection (if and only if it is of bacterial origin). The pain relief you child had whilst fighting the infection whether it was from a bacterial infection or not would not have come from antibiotics and I do not wish to be praised for my comments on this site.
By the way antibiotics are a drug (and all have side effects) and they frequenty cause stomach upset (another reason they are not given out like smarties).
I hope your child is now feeling much better.
By the way antibiotics are a drug (and all have side effects) and they frequenty cause stomach upset (another reason they are not given out like smarties).
I hope your child is now feeling much better.
You may wonder why I wrote such a lengthy response on here. The reason is I'm discovering all the time that the public perception of health professionals in the country is very low.
This saddens me, I pride myself (if for nothing else) for always at the very least attempting to see things from another persons point of view but this trait is one I rarely see demonstrated by others.
Logically what possible reason would a caring profesional (someone who has chosen to work to care for others) have for 'witholding' a medicine if he/she thought it would be of benefit.
The only reasonable answer you can come up with is that they simply wouldn't (whether you understand the reasons or not).
This saddens me, I pride myself (if for nothing else) for always at the very least attempting to see things from another persons point of view but this trait is one I rarely see demonstrated by others.
Logically what possible reason would a caring profesional (someone who has chosen to work to care for others) have for 'witholding' a medicine if he/she thought it would be of benefit.
The only reasonable answer you can come up with is that they simply wouldn't (whether you understand the reasons or not).
1 to 16 of 16
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.