In article
<0093003c-c560-43cc-a62b-d4a6f5fbe170@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Chris says...
>
>On Jul 2, 7:52=EF=BF=BDam, Ericka Kammerer <e...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>> > That's fine by me, but definitely not my preferred method. I'm more
>> > inclined to work with my child to get to the bottom of an issue and
>> > therefore ask pertinent questions for either case - medical or
>> > behavioral. A 6-year-old is fully capable of answering some pointed
>> > questions honestly if not lead into a certain direction -- if she
>> > doesn't feel she can help it or change the problem, then medical
>> > evaluation should be pursued. I will avoid submitting my child for
>> > some painful, humiliating, invasive tests if at all possible. So, no,
>> > you don't have to automatically run to the doctor in every
>> > cir***stance. I can't imagine running my daughter into the office for
>> > unnecessary tests when I know full well what she is doing is
>> > behavioral.
>>
>> =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD I disagree in this case.
=EF=BF=BD=
>Just getting a urine sample
>> is not painful, invasive or humiliating, and UTIs can be fairly
>> silent (especially to a young child not all that in tune with
>> her body yet) and can be indicative of problems that you need
>> to get on top of ASAP. =EF=BF=BDIt's quick and easy to rule out an UTI,
>> at which point you have the leisure to pursue the behavioral
>> issues without running the risk of causing kidney damage.
>> =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BD I'm probably the last person on
ea=
>rth to run to the
>> doctor for every little thing, but unless I had some pretty
>> strong clues that the issue was behavioral (e.g., starting
>> to have accidents again right after the arrival of a new
>> sibling, or something like that), I think a trip to rule out
>> a UTI is entirely appropriate. =EF=BF=BDIf there *is* a UTI, then
>> further testing might be warranted and you'll need to make
>> a judicious decision then, but you'll at least know that
>> there definitely is a physical issue at that point.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Ericka
>
>Actually, Ericka, you are in agreement with me. I mentioned earlier
>that a simple urine sample is easy enough to obtain and that further
>testing beyond that I would put off unless I was unsure about it being
>behavioral and it was causing worry. The OP hasn't chimed in for a
>couple of days, and I'm assuming the doc visit they initially had
>would have included that first initial urine check-hopefully.
I don't understand this. Why is there this bright line drawn at a urine
test?
If the physician has suspicions, but the urine test is negative, if he
orders a
barium test, you'd say "no" then turn to assuming it's behavioral?
I think what makes sense it to investigate if there is a physical issue
first
(whatever it may be, UTI or something else), with the goal of either
pursuing it
or ruling it out. Period. Why second guess about which tests, etc.?
Banty
|
