Family prevented from using cream of choice on son's eczema

What happened

Ms P and Mr Q's son, who suffered from eczema, was under the care of a consultant dermatologist, because he had a severe skin infection. Ms P and Mr Q wanted to use an unpreserved herbal cream on their son's skin and not use the medicines prescribed. The dermatologist warned them that unpreserved creams are more likely to become contaminated with bacteria and cause infection. He told them that if their son became ill again, and they refused to follow medical advice it would be a child protection issue.

Ms P and Mr Q complained about how they had been treated. The Trust invited them to a meeting in its Child Assessment Unit, attended by the dermatologist and a paediatrician who was its safeguarding lead. They strongly advised Ms P and Mr Q to stop using the herbal cream but told them that the matter was not being treated as a safeguarding matter. Ms P and Mr Q complained that they had been unfairly denied the opportunity to use their preferred cream on their son's skin, because the Trust had dealt with the matter as a safeguarding issue. Responding to their complaint, the Trust confirmed that the use of unpreserved cream was a safeguarding matter.

What we found

There was insufficient evidence to justify dealing with the family's preference for unpreserved creams as a safeguarding matter. The Trust had been inconsistent in its communications with the Family as to whether or not the matter was one of safeguarding or not. This prevented the Family from using their chosen cream, and caused frustration and distress.

The Trust took too long to respond to Ms P and Mr Q's complaint, and its response was not customer–focused or objective because it failed to get an independent opinion.

Putting it right

The Trust apologised to Ms P and Ms Q for the mistakes and for the distress caused. It also paid them £500 compensation.