Advanced search

40 stone woman's CS costs £200k...thank you NHS!

(114 Posts)
Alexa808 Sun 17-Aug-08 10:29:02

Reading quite a few threads lately where mums-to-be are denied the resources of the NHS to have the birth they wish for (water, home, etc) I'm flabbergasted to read this:

hercules1 Sun 17-Aug-08 10:31:19

What would you rather have happened?

PortBlacksandResident Sun 17-Aug-08 10:31:25

What would you like the NHS to have done - let the babies die?

FWIW i think she looks really happy.

ZZMum Sun 17-Aug-08 10:33:39

so how should the NHS have handled it - left her to die? I am not so sure that this is accurately reported as my friend had c-section for triplets and she had similar number of people supporting her - there were 3 teams of midwives/peadeatricians/neonatal nurses etc in the room with her...

sure this is more sensationalist than accurate...

lilymolly Sun 17-Aug-08 10:36:10

look at what the doctor said at the end of the article.

Time to change
By Dr Hilary Jones

LEANNE and her babies are lucky to be alive. It’s incredibly rare for a woman of this size to get pregnant, let alone give birth to three healthy babies because overweight women tend to suffer major fertility problems.

"Triplets also carry enormous risks and put incredible stress on the body. Leanne’s heart would have been put under massive strain and she risked diabetes, deep vein thrombosis, high blood pressure, pre-eclampsia and liver and kidney failure. The caesarean would also carry dangers.

Leanne has been incredibly fortunate but if she wants to live to see her babies grow up she needs to start taking care of herself and lose weight drastically. It will be hard, but she needs support and practical help."

Really glad that this has had a happy outcome but she really needs all the support now to lose some weight and see her children grow up

kiskidee Sun 17-Aug-08 10:36:48

i saw the OP as comparing how differently women are treated under a health system which is supposed to be supportive and unbiased of a woman's decisions on her pregnancy and childbirth.

not judging the woman in the article.

MaloryDontDiveItsShallow Sun 17-Aug-08 10:37:50

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

wheresthehamster Sun 17-Aug-08 10:38:26

I think it's a lovely story. Good luck to her. I'm sure she will lose some weight just running around after the babies!

I hate the way articles are written to try and get your hackles up. Why mention the child benefit?

cupsoftea Sun 17-Aug-08 10:40:57

She needed at cs so got one - what about those who need cancer fighting drugs but are denied them?

herbietea Sun 17-Aug-08 10:43:25

Message withdrawn

MummyDoIt Sun 17-Aug-08 11:08:15

While I'm glad that the story has a happy outcome, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the idea of the lady making money from the story. If it were me, I'd be donating it to the special care baby unit at the hospital. Put something back in thanks for the care she and her babies have been given. Maybe she has done this, though I couldn't see it mentioned in the article.

DisenchantedPlusBump Sun 17-Aug-08 11:10:49



AvenaLife Sun 17-Aug-08 11:13:06

I think the way they have written this story is horrid. It makes her out to be a freak because she's so overweight. Poor woman. It's like they are taking the piss out of her. It's hardly supportive. angry

wotulookinat Sun 17-Aug-08 11:17:11

I don't see the problem.

wotulookinat Sun 17-Aug-08 11:18:17

And I bet she is actually no-where near 40 stone really.
GOod luck to her, I say. Lovely three little kiddies.

MummyDoIt Sun 17-Aug-08 11:26:05

Don't you wonder, though, what sort of care other patients in the hospital received at the same time? Those 68 medics weren't employed specifically to look after Leanne. Presumably, if they hadn't all be involved in her c-section, they would have been performing other procedures on other patients. Did other women giving birth receive as much attention that day? Surely midwives must have been in short supply if five of them were in theatre with Leanne.

I'm playing devil's advocate here. I'm not saying Leanne shouldn't have received that care - of course she should, no question. I'm just wondering what the consequences were on other people.

wotulookinat Sun 17-Aug-08 11:36:58

Someone has to get the care - if it wasn't her then it would have been some other emergency or something.
If we say she shouldn't have it then we are opening up a can of worms about the whole no care for smokers/drinkers etc etc.
As an overweight mother, I was treated appallingly when I was pregnant, but I was grateful to have had a healthy son. Good luck to her.

MintChocAddict Sun 17-Aug-08 11:38:19

Typical NOTW nonsense. You'd think she'd murdered someone FGS. The women looks happy and is obviously well aware that she needs to lose weight to keep herself healthy for her children.
There are lots of people in a variety of situations who will require more interventions from the NHS than Ms or Mr Average. That's just life.

wotulookinat Sun 17-Aug-08 11:40:43

Well said, Mint smile

KerryMum Sun 17-Aug-08 11:42:48

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

KerryMum Sun 17-Aug-08 11:44:16

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

edam Sun 17-Aug-08 11:46:33

Kerry, there are posters on MN who are morbidly obese. I think your remarks are very unkind.

wotulookinat Sun 17-Aug-08 11:48:47

Yes, I am.

KerryMum Sun 17-Aug-08 11:49:46

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

wotulookinat Sun 17-Aug-08 11:51:07

Not 40 stone, but morbidly obese. And I have a child. Not triplets - but if I had been having triplets, there wouldn't have been much I could do about it and I would have had them, and been very please with myself as well.

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