Hypnotherapy

I suspect that obtaining something like a largish dose of oral valium, or similar, before the injection would be more effective.

yes sedatives are an option, but you'd better tell him you're giving him it and why before hand or you'll run into legal trouble and it'll create lingering mistrust.

I was suggesting that the valium be administered by a clinician, as is often done before anaesthetic is given prior to surgery, or procedures like gastroscopy. As a minor, I think parental permission is enough legally, but maintaining trust is, of course, essential.

Yeah, interesting discussion, but to be honest that's a bit of rabbit hole, isn't it?

None of us (here) can really help with an emergency situation of that sort.  

Whatever the law says, and whatever the clinician is willing to do, that would only be effective if loss of life was imminent, and it would only kick the can down the road.  

If the root problem wasn't solved, the poor young man and his family would presumably end up in the same position again, eventually.   

We all have to cope with injections, currently for our whole lives, that's the issue.  

I think it's perhaps more helpful if we focus on what might help the family over the longer term? 

We can't determine the law or critical clinical issues but this group could be quite helpful in terms of sharing experience, ideas and suggestions, as some have already done.   

I suspect it isn't one thing, it will be a combination of things, and they'll have try stuff out and make judgements about whatever is suggested, judgements which only they can make. 

Researchers at The University of Bath (amongst many others) are working on alternatives to injections (https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/the-pain-free-injection-alternative-gets-a-boost/). 

That's just one example - there are projects like this (not just based on patches, but on things like Needle Free Jet Injectors (NFJIs) and other systems) all over the world, so I suspect that within a few years the problem may be solved by advancing technology.

But it may be a challenge to bridge that gap, and it would be great if we could help them to do that.  

if a child is Gillick competent then they can give informed consent. Which is not to be confused with the well established principal that in an emergency when a patient (of any age) is incapacitated the next of kin can consent their behalf.

TBH as the law stands the hospital staff didn't actually need your consent to perform an emergency appendectomy if the condition was imminently life threatening.

About the only way a person can refuse (with legal force) emergency treatment for another is if there is a valid lasting power of attorney that explicitly says this. And it does need to be explicitly just saying 'medical matters' isn't enough it has to specifically reference emergency life saving care.

That is based on the premise of informed consent. If a child is unable to give informed consent then parental consent is sufficient. My then thirteen-year-old daughter had a perforated appendix and her ability to do or understand anything, due to severe pain, was zero, her consent for an appendectomy was not sought, parental permission was entirely sufficient.

That is based on the premise of informed consent. If a child is unable to give informed consent then parental consent is sufficient. My then thirteen-year-old daughter had a perforated appendix and her ability to do or understand anything, due to severe pain, was zero, her consent for an appendectomy was not sought, parental permission was entirely sufficient.

Yeah, interesting discussion, but to be honest that's a bit of rabbit hole, isn't it?

None of us (here) can really help with an emergency situation of that sort.  

Whatever the law says, and whatever the clinician is willing to do, that would only be effective if loss of life was imminent, and it would only kick the can down the road.  

If the root problem wasn't solved, the poor young man and his family would presumably end up in the same position again, eventually.   

We all have to cope with injections, currently for our whole lives, that's the issue.  

I think it's perhaps more helpful if we focus on what might help the family over the longer term? 

We can't determine the law or critical clinical issues but this group could be quite helpful in terms of sharing experience, ideas and suggestions, as some have already done.   

I suspect it isn't one thing, it will be a combination of things, and they'll have try stuff out and make judgements about whatever is suggested, judgements which only they can make. 

Researchers at The University of Bath (amongst many others) are working on alternatives to injections (https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/the-pain-free-injection-alternative-gets-a-boost/). 

That's just one example - there are projects like this (not just based on patches, but on things like Needle Free Jet Injectors (NFJIs) and other systems) all over the world, so I suspect that within a few years the problem may be solved by advancing technology.

But it may be a challenge to bridge that gap, and it would be great if we could help them to do that.  

if a child is Gillick competent then they can give informed consent. Which is not to be confused with the well established principal that in an emergency when a patient (of any age) is incapacitated the next of kin can consent their behalf.

TBH as the law stands the hospital staff didn't actually need your consent to perform an emergency appendectomy if the condition was imminently life threatening.

About the only way a person can refuse (with legal force) emergency treatment for another is if there is a valid lasting power of attorney that explicitly says this. And it does need to be explicitly just saying 'medical matters' isn't enough it has to specifically reference emergency life saving care.