Conflicting Advice

  • 3 replies
  • 111 subscribers
  • 1262 views

We moved house at the beginning of March and getting my records transferred to a new NHS trust has been a nightmare. Registering with a new GP was very easy except for the fact that the new GP told me it was my responsibility to get my records transferred. I contacted my old GP and those records were transferred electronically within a few days except that they didn't arrive at the new GP practice for nearly three months having gone via Aberdeeen for some reason!

Once my GP finally received the records things began to move a bit and I was sent an appointment for the Glaucome Review clinic here. That appointment went well and all is hunky dory with my eyes.

A couple of weeks later I received a letter from the Urology department which said I should stop my hormone treatment immediately as I had been on it for two years and this was local policy. I contacted the Oncology Nurse Consultant who had seen me through the previous two and a half years of treatment and asked if this was correct as I had originally been told I would be on HT for three years. His advice was that, if I was tolerating the HT, OK, then I should stay on it for the full three years due to the aggressiveness and location of the tumour. I suspect that the new Oncology consultant hasn't seen any of my scans or biopsy results and just based his opinion on "local policy". 

I have decided to stay on the HT for the full three years (only three more to go as I had one yesterday) as I think the advice of my trusted Oncology Nurse Consultant is more valid.

  • Hi Seamus

    As has been mentioned on here many times before , all these 'specialists' seem to have their own ideas regards the length of time to stay on HT.

    I go along with your view, to follow your original oncology nurse as they have been following you for presumably some years.

    Best wishes

    Steve

  • Totally agree with you Seamus.  I think you are right that the urologist based his decision on local policy and had probably not read through all your notes - just noticed how long you had been on the HT and little else. 

    All the best,

    Des

  • Each consultant seems to go their own way in part and as Steve says different ideas abound. I suppose it’s not an exact science but if tumours are aggressive and 3 years is the plan then that seems the right thing to continue. All the best Seamus. 

    Ido4