To ask if anyone is setting up a fb page to discuss Tricky Dicky?

[IAmOnMyBike]

It seems we are not allowed to speak about anything negative elsewhere. Please do not speak badly of Tricky Dicky and co.

But you can promote your fundraising campaign LikeABad. Another one here who is disappointed that MN pulled the thread, it is an important lesson in (possible) scams. And stealing from the poor and kind-hearted is the lowest and easiest type of scam.

Is it in any way true that someone on the new FB page (which I'm not on) questioned whether the baby was even born premature? Please tell me that's not true…

When I say "please tell me that's not true", I mean peace tell me no one suggested that on the private Facebook group. They are watching, obvs.

Can't see anything saying that or anything mean about tha parents or the baby.

OK. That's the line peddled by someone on the TD page. Just checking as I can't see.

Been following this from the start but not posted. Can't believe hasn't been spotted by Daily Mail they are usually quick to pick up on mumsnet threads which are newsworthy.

I'm the person who had the private message screen grabbed and posted on the Facebook group. I'm a semi regular poster and big time lurker. I'd just like to thank the people who leapt to my defence from here yesterday and reported the post to Facebook.

I missed most of the comments posted about me online, just as well probably, and the private messages were a mixture of support for me and fairly pointless abuse from people who struggled to write a sentence. It all went quiet at about 2am and I'm hoping it stays that way.

Glad it's calmed down.

Can't quite believe netmums is facilitating an open discussion on the issue where mumsnet has shut it down.

I know, scary isn't it

I cant believe its been pulled. I had been following the thread (didnt post as I didnt have anything to add that hadnt already been said).
Have just requested to join FB group. How will admin know its me?

I just want to say I would have joined the FB page, as I totally disagree with this misleading attempt to fundraise for medical fees and later 'for expenses', all of which now seem to be covered by various sources (insurance/RMHC/Maternity Pay etc.) Knowing a baby was on the way, I am also quite sure that this couple would not have blown all their savings on a luxury holiday...
However, I don't dare join the FB page, as it could affect my job (I suspect my employers monitor/check FB.)
I am annoyed that Mumsnet pulled both threads on here. I'm sure they had their reasons, but as far as I'm aware, Mumsnet is the only large-scale forum who has the might to actually challenge these people via the media and present a more balanced approach than the one-sided couple in financial need angle, that has been reported internationally.

There seems to be a split, with a few saying it's dodgy and some not. Seems a reasonable debate and well informed

I suspect this started off as a bit of a whip round in the pub and grew from there. I think the bloke leading it just thought it would be helpful and naively set out to do 'something' but didn't think it through at all. Clearly he and some of the FB followers aren't the most sophisticated in their thinking, and some of their responses have been horrible. However people have the choice to spend their money on whatever they like, I choose not to donate because I'd rather donate to registered charities (because of all of this sort of thing) Assuming that people have the mental capacity to make those decisions it's up to them whether they want to donate?
I wonder whether the backlash is becoming too much now? Perhaps it would be most helpful to raise the concerns and move on rather than getting caught in it?

The NetHuns debate is actually quite balanced. Some think it's a scam others think it's a legitimate fund raising attempt.

It isn't as simple as asking whether it is a legitimate fundraising effort or not.

He began raising money in order to pay medical costs. It is now not disputed that these are covered by insurance.

He eventually changed his line, after much prompting and delay, to say that they are fundraising for living costs in New York. These are also covered by insurance.

If there is any excess money after these living costs in New York have been paid, the money is going to pay their bills back home. You might think that's fair enough, but that's not what the money was donated full and they also have an excess of £10,000 now. I would imagine that is plenty. So why is he still fundraising?
If there is any money left over after all that is paid, it seems that the money is going towards the child in some way. Again, you may think that is fair enough, but this is now effectively a large baby shower. Having suggestions that the money will pave to decorate his nursery, pay for nappies, a pram, or going to trust fund.

Sorry full of typos. Bottom line is there ain't going to be any left for Ronald McDonald house after uncle dean's minibar bill is paid and to raise money for your kids nappies and a pram on the pretences is dishonest.

Of course that should say IN excess of £10,000. There is no insurance excess on claims of this type.

There was never any suggestion from anyone other than TD and the parents that insurance would cover medical bills. The insurance company confirmed cover within a few days, all over the new year period, which is standard practice.

TD has yet to admit that their living expenses in New York will also be covered.

The Huns are now all saying that the money will be used to give baby Dax "best start in life".

There was never any suggestion from anyone other than TD and the parents that insurance would NOT cover medical bills.

Bloody phone!