Advanced search

Baby born at 16 weeks turned away

(112 Posts)
burstingbug Thu 21-Jun-07 09:23:39

It's just been on the Wright Stuff

cba Thu 21-Jun-07 09:24:52

How awful, poor mother.

FioFio Thu 21-Jun-07 09:25:09

Message withdrawn

HenriettaHippo Thu 21-Jun-07 09:26:56

That reads like real Sun-style sensationalist writing at its worst. Written to shock and upset. I think it's appalling journalism.

goingfor3 Thu 21-Jun-07 09:28:18

It wouldn't have survided trying would have just given the parents false hope and prolonged any agony for the baby. My first baby was born at 20 weeks and at that stage it is better to let the baby die in peace.
I agree that they could have treated them with more compassion.

bookthief Thu 21-Jun-07 09:30:11

The hospital should have taken its lead from the parents and accepted the baby at maternity if that's what they wanted.

Agree at 16 weeks there was no chance - I'm amazed that its lungs were even mature enough to breathe that long, perhaps dates were wrong?

burstingbug Thu 21-Jun-07 09:30:16

I think the WStuff took it from another paper, although I only found it on the online sun

cylonbabe Thu 21-Jun-07 09:30:39

bad journalism.
its a miracle thebaby was breathing. but i think the maternity unit did the right thing.
babies bron before 23 weeks dont even require a death certificate. all of whichis based on solid grounds.
truly awful for the family. my sympathies for them.

mytwopenceworth Thu 21-Jun-07 09:31:47

Yes, s/he probably would have died. But, you know, maybe, just maybe, not. Smaller and smaller babies are being saved. This little one was breathing without assistance, that surely has to mean s/he had some fight in him/her (I just can't bring myself to type 'it'), some prems don't do that. They never gave him/her a chance. You know what I thought though, 16 weeks and you can still abort. It made me wonder how many late abortions are delivered breathing.

goingfor3 Thu 21-Jun-07 09:32:02

The baby was only 5 inches they wouldn't even had any equipment small enough to treat it with.

hatrick Thu 21-Jun-07 09:32:52

Message withdrawn

goingfor3 Thu 21-Jun-07 09:33:18

mytwopenceworth - I thought that they killed the baby before late abortions.

FioFio Thu 21-Jun-07 09:33:38

Message withdrawn

BabiesEverywhere Thu 21-Jun-07 09:36:34

BibiThree Thu 21-Jun-07 09:37:02

I lost a baby at 16 weeks and he was absolutely tiny. I agree that the chances of this one surviving were incredibly small, but also think that mother and baby should have been treated better than this.

Callisto Thu 21-Jun-07 09:54:16

I lost a baby at 16 weeks too and it was hell. I was very lucky to have very sympathetic and understanding staff. I feel really sorry for the parents of this baby, but I wouldn't believe a word the Sun says about their treatment tbh. Also, if it is hopital policy to not treat babies born under 22 weeks the paramedics would have known this so it doesn't really add up to me.

Callisto Thu 21-Jun-07 09:55:34

I don't live in a mansion with tons of people running after me btw, staff meant doctors and nurses.

LIZS Thu 21-Jun-07 09:58:49

Agree I would have thought the paramedics would feel less qualified and suitably equipped than the midwives to deal with such a young baby. I wonder if perhaps the dates got confused or the story hasn't been entirely accurate. Surely the mother/baby would have been taken to an EPU initially ?

lulumama Thu 21-Jun-07 10:00:20

article implies the baby would have survived if admitted to maternity unit.....extremely unlikely, in fact impossible i would have thought.....but yes, the parents should have been treated with compassion and dignity

NerdMagnet Thu 21-Jun-07 10:02:57

It sounds like the family were treated appallingly, and without any compassion or care.
The baby would not have survived despite medical intervention, but the family should have been supported and given privacy to hold their baby until he/she died.

edam Thu 21-Jun-07 10:04:19

One of my friends is a neonatal nurse - will be interested to see what she makes of this. Agree with everyone who said no hope of survival at that age but parents and baby should have been looked after. I can't imagine A&E is a good place to be with a baby who is struggling to survive.

FioFio Thu 21-Jun-07 10:06:45

Message withdrawn

Marne Thu 21-Jun-07 10:08:19

So but surely the baby would'nt have pulled through, maybe the maternity ward was full up and they had to prioritise other prem babbies which actualy had a chance of surviving.

I think if i was the mother i would of wanted them to at least try,after all its a living person but in the eyes of the NHS it is not a living person. So sad but if it did survive what sort of life would it have?

My heart goes out to the mother.

Aitch Thu 21-Jun-07 10:09:13

i just don't think there's much truth in this.

NBuGgeration Thu 21-Jun-07 10:15:06

Shocking journalism there.

Stupid Sun paper.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now