Chief Medical Officer's Working Group on CFS/ME
Home
Children's Sub-Group - Briefing No 1 - March 1999
Terms of Reference: To review management and practice in the field of CFS/ME with the aim
of providing best practice guidance for professionals, patients and carers to improve the
quality of care and treatment for people with CFS/ME
At its first, very positive, wide-ranging and constructive meeting, the Children's
Sub-Group both mirrored the discussion of the Key Group a fortnight earlier and focused on
those issues specifically affecting children and young people. The Sub-Group also agreed
that its remit made it desirable to include a parent as an extra member, and to invite as
participating observers, a social services representative, an educational psychologist and
other experts from time to time as needed.
1. Key Working Principles:
o As with the key group, the sub-group intends to distribute information
widely about its work, via regular post-meeting Briefings.
o To be effective, the sub-group must operate in an atmosphere of mutual
respect towards members with differing views, and aim to maximise the degree of consensus
which it can achieve.
o Smaller 'focus' groups, which may invite in outside expertise, will be
set up to work on particular issues e.g. CBT, educational priorities, support for
families.
o To capture a wide range of views from those most directly affected,
there will be a 'sounding board' event in the autumn for parents and children.
o Some research finding needs to be earmarked for children's issues
2. The End Product:
o A reliable document which will stand the test of time and lead to a
consistent and effective model of care. Because it is specific to children, it will need
to ensure that health, educational and social service issues are all incorporated in an
integrated fashion.
3. The labelling of CFS/ME as a psychiatric disorder
The Group had discussed the following issues: whether CFS/ME is a physical or psychiatric
disorder or has both aspects; why it is frequently diagnosed as psychiatric when other
unpredictable chronic diseases are not; whether it is positively being diagnosed as a
psychiatric disorder or by exclusion because of a hierarchy of diagnosis, under which
illnesses without obvious and clear physical signs are least likely to be diagnosed as
physical; the possible need for a differential diagnosis to establish whether the fatigue
associated with CFS/ME is due to a psychiatric or physical disorder; the stigma associated
with psychiatric illness which leads to resistance to psychiatric diagnosis even where
this is appropriate; the adverse effect on securing social security benefits if a
psychiatric diagnosis is given; the need for humility, open mindedness and lack of
dogmatic position-taking in the face of current uncertainties
4. Scope of Work:
Below are the wide range of potential issues for consideration which the Group identified.
This will be formulated into a work programme to be carried out in the coming eighteen
months:
o Diagnosis in children including problems around delay and lack of
expertise
o The social context i.e. problems arising because of disbelief about
the reality of the illness by professionals,
family, friends, the education system,
such problems being compounded by the frequent inability of children to
express the nature of their illness and
symptoms.
o Management: It is important to ask whether any intervention which is
presently made is actually at all effective? Specific issues to be addressed include
medication levels; the suitability of CBT and graded exercise for children; lack of
informed consent to treatment; how to enable children to engage in self management.
o Service provision including the role of community paediatricians, the
relationship between paediatrics and
psychiatry and the value of a collaborative approach in achieving an appropriate diagnosis
and a fully integrated model of
care.
o Childhood development including problems around adolescence, the
impact on families of a child with CFS/ME
o Education including missed schooling, home tuition, flexible
schooling, problems arising from cognitive
disfunction, adapting solutions to be
suit each individual child's needs.
o Legal issues especially child protection, school non attendance laws,
special needs entitlement and informed
consent to treatment.
o State Benefits: are families receiving their entitlements? Any
specific problems around benefits targeted to children?
3. Future meetings
Arrangements are being made for early discussion of the following three issues
o developing specific diagnostic criteria for children, and
o problems around child protection law
o organising the parents' and children's 'sounding board event
Please note: To avoid repetition, this Briefing has not reproduced debate which featured
at the Key Group first meeting. It should therefore be read in conjunction with the
Briefing issued after the first Key Group Meeting.
Members of the information Group contributing to this Briefings Judy Acreman Rachel Lvnds.
Harvey Marcovich Naomi Wayne
Contact Point: Dr Leslev Cooper, Secretary to the Working Group, c/o Action for ME, 4
Deans Court. St Paul's Churchvard. London EC4V 5AA