Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Baby born at 16 weeks turned away

111 replies

burstingbug · 21/06/2007 09:23

It's just been on the Wright Stuff

OP posts:
belgo · 21/06/2007 10:24

As far as I can tell from the article (however much truth there is in it), the parents weren't treated badly. It doesn't really say how they were treated in fact.

mumto3girls · 21/06/2007 10:30

Surely the paramedics should have been told to just let the parents stay at home with the baby, cuddle him/her and let nature take it's course rather than dragging them around and dropping them eventually at A & E?

belgo · 21/06/2007 10:32

I think with a miscarriage at 16 weeks it was necessary to take them to hospital, as there can be complications. The paramedics should have known where to take them.

A miscarriage at 16 weeks is a bad thing to happen, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the medics or hospital did anything wrong.

jellybeans · 21/06/2007 10:35

Very sad story I went into labout at 20 wks and was told if my DD was breathing they wouldn't do anything as it was too early. Sadly she didn't make the birth. It is a very difficult one but I was in maternity and usually they have a bereavement suite. Even though it is classed as miscarriage, it was no different for me than my DD who was sadly born still at 24 wks. Hope the poor family are OK.

Nemo2007 · 21/06/2007 10:43

also think at 16wks wouldnt have survived but the baby was breathing and the parents were in distress could they have not admitted them and then explained?

mumto3girls · 21/06/2007 10:47

God - I just thought a horrible thought. Would she have gone home with the little mite?

Sorry if this question upsets anyone but what does happen to babies born that early then if they are treated as miscarriages?

mozhe · 21/06/2007 10:51

The baby would not have survived it is just impossible....sad way to treat the family though. I would have admitted to Queen Charlottes as I know they have special facilities,( where stillborn/late TOPs can be looked after...ie; away from the main units with full term gurggling babies..), and allowed the baby to die there....just tlc, no treatment though.
Very

belgo · 21/06/2007 10:52

she could have asked to take the baby home. Maybe she did.

What I find really scarey, as someone has already mentioned, is that babies can be aborted at this stage, and far later as well. Some aborted babies are born breathing.

goingfor3 · 21/06/2007 10:54

The hospital aranged a funeral and burial plot at no cost to us for my baby who was born at 20 weeks. I don't know at what age they start doing this.

Aitch · 21/06/2007 11:01

my brother is a paramedic, i'm certain that if they had a breathing baby in their arms they would have tried to do something out of human decency. that's why i don't think the story is right. a breathing baby at 16 weeks? they'd have been all over it like a rash i'd have thought, it's a career-making story if it survived. i'm certain we're not getting anywhere near the true story here.

Aitch · 21/06/2007 11:02

i mention that my brother is a paramedic only because they are by and large not utterly barbaric, which is what you'd have to be not to take some pity on this family.

belgo · 21/06/2007 11:04

aitch - I think you're right. Also the paramedics would have known where to take her, at least they would have phoned ahead.

saralou · 21/06/2007 11:04

poor journalism

saralou · 21/06/2007 11:07

i've seen many babies born at 16 weeks... i've seen them try to breathe, yawn even whilst they're still attached to the placenta... but once the cord is cut.. i just can't see that happening

lissie · 21/06/2007 11:12

terrible journalism, they imply that a maternity unit may have been able to save this poor little mite, but its just not possible. the poor parents tho

saralou that must be awful!

HenriettaHippo · 21/06/2007 11:19

Aitch, I think you are right. I am sure this story has been sensationalised by the journalist/paper to a point that will no doubt raise lots of debate about abortion ages again. It is trying to grab a headline and sell copy. I think it is disgusting to use a family's distress in this way.

A miscarriage at 16 weeks is very distressing and painful, especially since you can see the baby (not at all to denigrate the distress of any miscarriage, at any point in pregnancy), and the last thing this family needs is to read about their pain in the Sun.

Funny isn't it, I've done a google search, and can't find this story "reported" by any other newspapers.

morocco · 21/06/2007 11:23

how awful and sad for the family on all levels really.

TheArmadillo · 21/06/2007 13:25

I think this is appalling journalism, and implies that the baby died because the maternity unit told the paramedics to take the baby to a&e 'yards' away. Presumably having been taken by ambulance they would have not gone to reception but through to the back area and treated straight away. So I think the 'hanging about with drunks' is a bit off the track.

I really feel for the parents and can't see what this article by the Sun is supposed to achieve except possibly upset them more. It's a horrible situation for them all round.

VeniVidiVickiQV · 21/06/2007 13:31

Poor poor poor journalism

Interesting to note that the baby was breathing at 16 weeks. I didnt think it was possible for them to have functioning lungs, let alone ones that provide enough oxygenation. Agree - something doesnt sound right.

Poor parents...

TheArmadillo · 21/06/2007 13:34

Also, the maternity unit may have been dealing with several other emergencies at the time and may not have had the resources to deal with this and so sent them to the A&E for that reason as well.

It must have been an horrific experience for the parents though to lose their baby at 16 weeks, and to have to watch it die.

minorityrules · 22/06/2007 01:52

The article doesn't say if the baby was breathing naturally or if it was being vented either. Can't you keep most people "alive' through CPR? I would imagine, if the baby took a few breaths, then the paramendics would start resusitation

I also read it as the paramedics were the ones told to go to A&E. Did the parents even know what was being discussed? How awful if they read it and didn't know

This is classic example of why I no longer read newspapers, you never get the full story

frances5 · 22/06/2007 10:21

It was a horrendous experience for the family and they should have been looked after better.

I think it would be morally wrong to keep a 16 week old gestation baby alive. Even if the child survived, it would require years and years in intensive care and would be probably suffer major brain damage and have no quality of life.

If anyone remembers the fight to save Charolotte Wyatt life and the fact that after saving her she ended up in foster care because her parents couldn't cope with a profoundly disabled child.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/6054292.stm

What has honestly been gained from keeping Charlotte alive.

I think its best to make such a tiny baby as comfortable as possible and let nature take its course.

SilentTerror · 22/06/2007 17:43

No baby can survive at 16 weeks gestation.The cut off point for whether cases are treated by maternity units or gynaecology wards (poss via A and E)differs from hospital to hospital but in general any gestation under 20 weeks would not go to maternity.There would be little point,which sounds harsh but there is no point raising false hopes of the unattainable.Parents are offered the chance to arrange a 'funeral' in most hospitals now I think after 12/14 weeks gestation,but below that 'feotal tissue' is disposed of by the hospital.
I hope I haven't offended anyone but I am a Paediatric and Neonatal nurse and have had a late miscarriage myself.

FioFio · 22/06/2007 18:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

MissPitstop · 23/06/2007 14:23

I have had to deal with a situation very similar to this myself whilst at work. If a paramedic delivers a baby that is born breathing then they have to begin to resuatate/aid breathing etc as our protocols do not allow us to diagnose death under 17 years of age and if signs of life (ie breathing and/or a pulse) have been seen in the last 15 mins then resusitation is required. A paramedic crew will always take advise from the hospital as to where they are to take a patient, this is done via the ambulance control whilst the crew are on their way to hospital so as not to cause delays often the parents would be unaware of this happening. I can empathise with parents, paramedics, doctors and nurses involved when things like this happen as they are deeply distressing no mater how compasionately and professionally they are delt with, having an ordeal like this then plastered all over the tabloid press only causes further distress. I only hope that the parents are allowed to grieve for their loss without them being hounded by the press and any questions that they have about the treatment they recieved are answered quickly and honestly.