One of the most complicated experiences for parents on an emotional level is one in which their child becomes ill and must be treated or when you have to do invasive tests or procedures.
The moment you enter through the door of a health center it seems that you lose control of your child, as if you gave the responsibility to the doctors who will treat him. This has its logic, because it is the health professionals who are going to act to try to restore the physical health of the child, however, there is sometimes a great emotional void in dealing with children and in such cases parents are necessary understanding that they are next to your child supporting him.
In the European Charter of Hospitalized Children you can read that a child is entitled “To be accompanied by their parents or the person who replaces them as long as possible during their stay in the hospital, without impeding the application of the necessary treatments for the child”.
Despite this, there are many professionals who, before a procedure (such as a suture, a blood test, a catheterization, etc.), urge parents to leave the child alone, even saying that they are "norms of the center."
The opinion of the parents
In recent years more and more parents declare that they want to be present at the moment it is done Some proof to your son. Some studies (the least) talk about less than half of the parents want to be with their child at that time, while there are others (the majority) in which the figure is close to 90%. In any case, most parents would like to have at least the option to decide.
This decision option focuses, above all, on the type of procedure to be performed, since the more invasive the procedure, the less parents wish to be present (we speak for example of a cardio-pulmonary resuscitation or an endotracheal intubation).
As a general rule, parents believe that their presence helps their child, as it allows them to show that they support and love him. Interestingly, or perhaps not so much, accompaniment not only benefits the child, but also the parents. Several studies in this regard show that parents who witness the treatments and tests performed on their children have less anxiety than those who decide not to.
In addition, parents feel that they are part of the process and that they are helping the health staff, since when observing the role of parents in these circumstances it has been seen that more than 90% of parents talk with their children to calm them down and close to 80% maintain direct physical contact with them.
How children feel
Depending on the age of the children, it is difficult to assess the benefits of the fact that parents are present during a test. This is due to the difficulty in assessing pain (many children do not speak or do not know very well how to describe the pain).
But nevertheless, it seems logical that in a stressful situation for a child, all possible strategies to calm anxiety are sought and the presence of the parents is, without a doubt, one of them.
Some authors have tried to quantify these benefits and have achieved disparate results, since in some studies it is observed that children behave worse when their parents are there and in others, on the other hand, it seems that they behave better. However, from my point of view, the objective of these studies is erroneous, because what matters is not that the child behaves better or worse, but that I live the moment with the least possible anxiety (I as a nurse never get to me it would happen to take out the parents to make the child, scared, be quieter).
What do health professionals think
The only Spanish study in which the opinion of health personnel is collected shows that 95% of doctors are in favor of the presence of family members along with the child, while only 45% of nurses and 50% of auxiliaries think alike.
The reasons that are argued against are the following (besides enumerating them I will comment them):
- Greater nervousness of children: It is not true. The most logical thing is that in a stressful situation where a child is likely to be harmed (damage caused by various unknown people), he feels more accompanied if he is in direct contact with a relative or, if at least, has eye contact with him. The more you just feel, the more nervous and scared you will be.
- Greater anguish of parents: It is not true. Faced with a situation in which a child should have a painful procedure that he does not understand (or although he understands), the parents make guts heart and prefer, as a general rule, to be present talking and shaking hands, if possible, to his son, to show him that they are there for whatever it takes. The most logical thing is that the nerves are much higher if they are outside, knowing that your child is having a hard time without them being able to do anything.
- Increased risk of complaints: unfortunate. A malpractice is as much if the parents are present as if they are not. I imagine that the grace is that if the parents do not see it, you can always hide the wrong work. On the other hand, the goal should always be to seek the greatest benefit of the child, so having parents go outside to avoid a possible complaint seems, as I say, unfortunate. In addition, some studies suggest that when parents witness the interventions of professionals and observe that they do everything they can for their child, they have less anxiety, fewer doubts ("I think they could have done more") and show more gratitude for the effort made.
- Interruption of the procedure: In no of the studies carried out in this regard has any case of interruption of the procedure been commented. This does not mean that there is no parent who, seeing his son suffer, decides to stop the test or treatment, however they must be so few, that the mere fact of suggesting it is disrespectful and out of place (and see that I have heard Sometimes: “I prefer that they be outside because someone can throw you over”).
- Longer procedure duration: Depends. Some procedures may be slower and in others there will hardly be a difference (put a way, draw blood, suture a wound, ...). Anyway, it seems more logical to take more time to do something to get a child to live the moment in the best possible way than to ignore his well-being To finish before.
- Greater nervousness of health personnel: It is also possible, although following the thread of the previous point, the one that matters is the child, not the health personnel. If a professional becomes nervous because parents are present trying to support a child who may suffer a lot, they will have to look for strategies to calm those nerves. No one is born taught and it is clear that the first few times the hand shakes, however time brings security and security brings serenity.
- Worst performance of health personnel: Unfortunate. We have to look for the welfare of children, not for the performance of health workers. As I said, whoever does not know, do to learn, but do not put parents as an excuse.
- Interference in the training of health personnel: Logic. Nobody likes to see their child suffer, so parents always want what is going to be done to a child, be done in the best conditions and in the shortest time. Despite this we can understand that someone is learning and may have less practice when performing some procedures (as long as he is able to retire on time if he sees that he is not capable). In any case, if a parent refuses a student to perform any technique, his decision should be respected.
Returning to children's rights ...
Both talk about benefits and opinions of parents and professionals to say, finally, that although someone thinks that it is better that parents are not present, It is a child's right to be accompanied at all times by an adult. That is, parents should not say "I have the right to be with my child", but "my child has the right to be with his parents." This means that health professionals should not "invite" parents to wait outside, even when they argue that they are center rules, because, I repeat, it is a fundamental right of children.
A personal experience
When Jon was two years old, he fell at home, getting a head injury that required a stitch. At the Hospital they invited us out, but Miriam flatly refused. I did not know that it was a right of my son, so I swam between two waters, as a father I saw normal to accompany my son, but as a health worker I understood his position, more than anything because I had it normalized (from so many invitations to leave, one believes end that must be so).
Finally, after several “tug of war”, they sutured Jon in our presence. Then a doctor came up and said:
I understand your position because I am also a father, but you cannot do this because you are implying to the child that we hurt him and that you are not doing anything about it.
Since all tortillas have two faces, we decided to turn it over and see what was under there:
Yes, but after having opened the head, you have to suture yes or yes, so since you have to sew and hurt, I prefer to explain that you have to do it, that it will hurt, but that dad and / or mom is not going to separate at any time from him.
In a few days I tell you some other personal case, because like many fathers and mothers, I have met more than once in this situation.
Photos | Ateo Fiel on Flickr
Babies and more | Rights of the hospitalized child (and his parents), The rights of the hospitalized child, How to deal with a childhood illness
