I AM THE MOM: Hospital Has Another Thing Coming

[aligncare]

I AM THE MOM: Hospital Has Another Thing Coming When It Pushes 1-on-1 with Michigan Woman’s Daughter

Christy Duffy is setting the internet on fire with a viral blog post about her recent experience at a Michigan hospital. It started when she was taking her daughter in for an appointment and saw this notice:



The flyer stated that new state laws require nurses to hold a “short 5 minute private conversation with your child.”

Duffy asked if she could opt out of the policy, but the receptionist explained that it was mandatory. Needless to say, Duffy was not pleased. The situation got even more absurd when the office manager described what exactly they would be speaking to her daughter about. She wrote on her blog:

More at ijreview.com

[Oceander]

I'm going to guess before I read the article:  the conversation was about the "wonders" of contraception.

[aligncare]

BINGO!

[Oceander]

I'm going to guess before I read the article:  the conversation was about the "wonders" of contraception.

yup, I was more or less correct:

She said there was a new policy that would allow a child to access his/her medical records online and the child would be allowed to block a parent from viewing the website.  The nurse would also inform my children that the doctor’s office is a safe place for them to receive information about STDs, HIV and birth control.  That is what the nurse would be chatting about with my children without any pesky parental oversight.

disgusting

[aligncare]

"The state" owns your children.

James Madison is spinning in his grave.

[Oceander]

If that is really what the law requires, then it's unconstitutional, certainly with respect to 12 year-olds, and quite possibly to 17 year-olds as well.

[mountaineer]

Here's the mom's original blog post about the sign.

Monday, June 02, 2014I. Am. The. Mom.
Let’s get one thing straight: no doctor or nurse is going to sequester my children in an exam room and talk to them privately. Period. This public service announcement made necessary because of this sign, posted at the check-in counter of my doctor’s office: (photo of sign)

I was there last week for an appointment for Amy. She hurt her foot, which makes dancing difficult, so we had to get that checked out. Amy is 17; I asked if this policy was in effect and if so, how could I opt out. The receptionist told me it’s a new law and there is no opting out. Working to keep my cool, I said, “I’m sure there is.” She said, “No, there isn’t.” At which point I asked if I needed to leave and go to the urgent care center because I was not submitting my daughter to such a conversation.

That did not go over well

The receptionist closed the window. Almost immediately, the office manager turned the corner and said, “Mrs. Duffy, may I speak with you?”

She said there was a new policy that would allow a child to access his/her medical records online and the child would be allowed to block a parent from viewing the website. The nurse would also inform my children that the doctor's office is a safe place for them to receive information about STDs, HIV and birth control. That is what the nurse would be chatting about with my children without any pesky parental oversight.

I kindly informed her that no one would be talking with my children privately, and I needed to know how to opt out of this policy before bringing Amy back for her physical next month. (Yay for physicals! Amy is so excited.)

By this time, the doctor was ready to see Amy so I had to cut the conversation short because I was not letting my girl out of my eyesight or earshot. Not when it was clear that these people were angling to undermine my parental authority.

Does that sound a bit dramatic to you? It shouldn’t. Because that is exactly what they are trying to do.

Make sure this is crystal clear: what they want to do is talk to your child about sex and drugs (maybe rock and roll – who knows?) without your input. Is it really such a stretch to imagine that a doctor who does not value abstinence before marriage would encourage your daughters – as young as 12! – to receive birth control? Is it really such a stretch to imagine a nurse telling a young boy – because a 12 year old boy is a BOY – that she will give him condoms so he can be “safe”? Is this what you want told to your children without the ability to filter the info through your world view?

Should a doctor ever ask to speak to a child without a parent present? If he/she suspects abuse then of course. But short of evidence of abuse, a doctor should not need to speak to a child alone.

I am the Mom. I will pick who can talk to my kids about sex and drugs. And rock-n-roll for that matter.

Regardless what health care provider you choose, please know that no one has the right to remove you from your child’s exam room. Perhaps if more of us stood up for our rights as parents, this ludicrous undermining of parental authority might end.

She later wrote that the sign came down ...

... The ability of the minor to deny his parents access to the on-line portion of his medical records is required by law. The ability of a medical professional to offer reproductive care without parental consent is required by law. What is not required is the five minute private conversation between a minor and a nurse.

According to Kim, this was an overstep of my particular office. She said in no uncertain terms that the sign should not have been posted. She said the medical group was not ready to implement the policy because they don't even know how they'll implement it. Someone just jumped the gun. And the sign was removed. ...

[Chieftain]

If that is really what the law requires, then it's unconstitutional, certainly with respect to 12 year-olds, and quite possibly to 17 year-olds as well.

And therein lies the problem.  If that sign had not come down it would have required a lawsuit that would take years to work its way up the food chain to SCOTUS to ultimately rule on the constitutionality.

[alicewonders]

You'd better believe that the only reason the sign came down was because it wasn't part of the law - YET!  A little loophole they forgot to include.  I guarantee they will add it to the law and then it will be required.