to think you don't go on holiday whilst having a high risk pregnancy and without adequate insurance

[Defenderwife]

Woman gives birth after food poisoning whilst on holiday in the Dominic Republic.

She had a cervical cerclage so knew she had a high risk pregnancy.

Her insurance didn't cover her entire pregnancy.

They are now stranded with a premature baby in a foreign country with no financial help and are relying on donations and GoFundMe.

I have made a donation but inside I feel almost angry. Why on earth have they let themselves be in this situation? That poor poor child.

I understand why they don't want to risk another move. The babies look so tiny and vulnerable. Hope baby will be ok.

do they usually pay for treatment in a private hospital?

It's said that BUPA travel insurance policies do, but I believe that - at least in europe - you're expected to use the equivalent of the NHS hospitals

As ever it no doubt depends on the company and the policy limits, though I think they all expect an authorisation call when something happens? Obviously they won't just chuck money away, so if a cheaper option exists they'll probably go for that

do they usually pay for treatment in a private hospital?

My travel insurance did - Direct Line. It wasn't a huge amount though - a bit over £500 for an a&e type visit, x rays, cast, meds.

The non-private hospital was further away. We went to closest. Didn't know it was private until we got there.

We did have to pay up in advance of insurance - we paid on leaving the hospital. Travel Insurance paid out a couple of months later; no questions over hospital type.

Interesting that they say they don't want to move her. Yet, this only appears to be an issue depending on which way the move is. They are happy to use the money to move her from state to private, but don;t want to risk having to move her back from private to state, it would seem.

"Interesting that they say they don't want to move her. Yet, this only appears to be an issue depending on which way the move is. They are happy to use the money to move her from state to private, but don;t want to risk having to move her back from private to state, it would seem"

Man, the negative spin just keeps om coming.

What is wrong with you people?!

If you read what has been written by the people involved, then they explain quite clearly that:

1. They were forced to leave the private hospital. They did not want to do this and doing so put their baby at serious risk

1. Moving was traumatic for the baby and she lost weight after. The mum is worried that if they move her again it might be too much for her. This is a very premature baby we are talking about, please remember. The mum is not sure what is the right thing to do but is anxious about what the effect of moving might be on her baby.

It is obvious to anyone with half a brain in their heads that the parent's main concern is the safety of their newborn, very premature baby, not money.

What bitter, twisted lives some of you must lead. The mind boggles.

Cerseirys I purposely only blanked the names out on my post and not on the photo as their names are only google'able on the photo. They have posted their comments on a public Facebook page and they haven't posted anything contentious so I think it's ok to have the names on the photo.
I'm happy for the post to be deleted if it's not appropriate though

I hope the baby is doing ok. I wonder how many of the doctors and staff speak English.

Moving was traumatic for the baby and she lost weight after. The mum is worried that if they move her again it might be too much for her. This is a very premature baby we are talking about, please remember. The mum is not sure what is the right thing to do but is anxious about what the effect of moving might be on her baby.

---

So, surely the best course of action is to leave the baby where she is now. Especially if another move would prove risky.

Moving was traumatic for the baby and she lost weight after. The mum is worried that if they move her again it might be too much for her.

Exactly, they're in the hospital that is covered by insurance and they are staying there. So why are they saying they still need money & keeping the GFM open?

They can't have it both ways though.

The insurance covers the public hospital.
They say the public hospital is dirty and not good enough and she needs private.
But then claim they don't want to move her back to private.

So why do they need money then?

So, are they still raising money to cover the private hospital?

Those donations are still coming in thick and fast.

What a shame that GFM will take such a huge cut of it....

I think enough now

Do all those charity pages take a cut?

And yet the mother has time to write LONG posts on her GFM page. So concerned is she regarding her preemie

Fucking hell.

A pp says it could be as much as 8 percent.

Multivac - I get the feeling that stepping away from/hiding this thread might do no end of good for your blood pressure.

It's not a charity, no matter what they call it. Its now nothing but a money grabbing scam.
Insurance is paying in full for everything needed.
They are complaining they need the money for private care as the insurance won't pay for it.
They don't intend to move to private whether or not they have the money.

It's fraud. Bloody idiots to go in the first place, but not so stupid in the end now they have tens of thousands of pounds of other peoples money....

Wow, it doesn't make it very clear that they take that much of a cut.

"And yet the mother has time to write LONG posts on her GFM page. So concerned is she regarding her preemie."

And the witch hunt continues.

Again, what is wrong with you people?

When they didn't update people condemned them. Now she has people criticising her for updating.

They can't win can they?

Some seriously twisted thinking on this thread.

They could win if they stopped taking peoples money

"not so stupid in the end now they have tens of thousands of pounds of other peoples money...."

Jesus wept.

They have a very premature baby in a hospital with awful conditions which could affect the baby's survival rate.

No amount of money is worth that. Considering the insurance company have been awful to deal with so far and it looks like it's likely their fault the baby is missing out on the quality care she should be receiving (which could sabe her life, potentially) I wouldn't be in a hurry to trust them.

Insurance companies are notoriously slippery.

I wouldn't be giving a penny of any money back or donating until I was sure I didn't have to pay - to get my baby home, or for any more care.

The fund was for baby Evie's health and the parents are right to hold onto it until they're sure she doesn't need it. She is ever so vulnerable.

At the point they do not need the money they say they are going to donate it to charity.

We have no reason not to believe them. It's certainly what I'd do, so I have no problem in believing they will.

Those who are pointing the finger, is that the problem - maybe you would keep the money yourself so you find it hard to imagine someone else wouldn't?

They have made a statement not that the money is going to charity if not to Evie.

If people still want to donate under those circumstances then that is up to them.

"They could win if they stopped taking peoples money"

Really? All the small minded people heaping bile on a family in terrible circumstances are suddenly going to start being nice if they close the fund? I think not.

People were having a massive go at the family for not being covered, called them al sorts of names.

Then when they found out the family was in fact covered did they all apologise and stop calling them names? Did they heck.

They found new things to have a go at them about,

Despicable behaviour.