Baby dies in childbirth. Parents not allowed to take body home.

[RedToothBrush]

What has the UK become?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-48907130?__twitter_impression=TRUE
NHS fees: 'Couple couldn't take baby's body home'

Charging overseas patients for NHS care in England must be suspended until it is clear it is not harming women, the Royal College of Midwives has said.

A couple whose baby died following an emergency Caesarean were not given the body as they were unable to pay £10,000 in medical fees, one doctor has said.

Joe Rylands said the expansion of charging had caused "disbelief" among many colleagues.

The Department of Health said the charges had raised £1.3bn since 2015.

In 2018, Dr Rylands was working in a maternity hospital when a woman from Western Europe on holiday in the UK came in - she was eight months pregnant and had started bleeding. Obstetricians performed an emergency Caesarean but the baby died.

When she and her partner were recovering on a ward, they were interviewed by an overseas visitors manager, in charge of billing.

Because they did not have a valid European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) they were told they had to pay £10,000 for the care they received - which they could not do.

And I 100% disagree with the policy before people jump on+

Those of you who say the body should have been released, where was the body being released to prior to repatriation? Which the parents couldn't afford.

I'm baffled by the idea that she planned to come to the UK to give birth to her baby for free on the NHS.

AFAIK all Western European countries have socialised health care (I live in one of them). And while, yes, you should get your freakin' EHIC card sorted before you travel, it can be done retrospectively if there's a bill involved. It's things like repatriation of a body that aren't covered by it.

I cannot imagine any reason why someone from a western European country would deliberately go to the UK to have their baby. Surely you'd start by sorting your EHIC card first? Why do people think this?

You'd expect this sort of thing in America,. Not here. Fucking Tory government.

I heard of a case (one of many similar) in America where a British couple had a premature baby but the ICU would have cost them £1million. They had to find a million quid or let the baby die.
Right wing capitalist ideology. Thanks.

There aren't that many countries in Western Europe, and almost all in the EU.
Articles say the couple didn't have a valid EHIC which seems to suggest they would have been eligible for one. Not sure why they would be here as "hospital tourists" instead of a couple having a holiday. The articles I have read say nothing about repatriation, it was the presentation of the baby in a bassinet for the parents to take home that wasn't allowed.
I don't understand this, surely a bill is issued and then if it can't subsequently be paid they follow it up in the normal way. Not by holding a baby's body hostage.
The blaming of the couple on here is nothing short of racist.

Again @fraggling.

I feel sorry they lost their baby, no one deserves that, but I don't feel sorry for the situation they now find themselves in with not being able to the pay the bills .

I think there is a lot of back story we are not being told.

Maybe the parents couldn't afford to take the baby back home or even pay for the burial?

As others have said, it costs thousands to bring home a dead member of a family, even a baby from a foreign country. Then there are funeral costs that could run into 3-4k. Not to mention cost of paperwork.

Its a horrible fact of life that it can costs thousands of pounds to bury a loved one. I know this from personal experience but I never had to factor in the expense and stress to bring someone home from another country thank the gods.

Well the article has been written as click-bait and shock tactics. NHS holds dead baby hostage is far more of an attention grabber than NHS can't release a baby's body to its parents as they have no means to store and repatriate

And how the hell is it racist?

Sounds like may be the facts are being twisted?

Is the body being held because the parents can't afford to repatriate? Repatriation is not anything to do with the NHS surely? However it may be there responsibility to ensure the body is released in the knowledge it will be dealt with appropriately and if that is not the case they can not release it.

This is possibly nothing to do with what the BBC have reported then.

It is a tragic story but is there more to it?
How would the parents have been able to repatriate the body?
Or were they expecting the nhs to pay for it?
If so I can see why they didn't release the body. But how very sad. No winners here

If the true story is that the hospital won't release the body as punishment because the couple can't pay for treatment, then that is very wrong. But if the story is that the couple can't afford to pay for repatriation of the body, then that is a whole different story.

Yes it might be callus not to hand over the remains but I bet this happens in a lot of other countries where you travel and don't have medical insurance.

Yes we all want to be a country which treats people like this and being callous is just fine if they don't have enough money.

This is a case which will do psychological harm to a mother. Thats the NHS actively and deliberately doing harm.

If this was done to a couple with the means to do so, I'm sue there'd have ground to actually sue the NHS.

Which if someone did manage a pro bono lawyer, would bring the cost issue into sharp focus pretty damn quickly.

I'm entirely with @badcat on this one.
If it was a British National in another country and this had of happened then they wouldn't be letting us off with such a bill either. Way too many people coming thinking the NHS is free for all, it is NOT!
Fault entirely lies with the parents I'm afraid, should have had the correct health insurance and she put herself and her baby at risk going away that late in the day anyway

Ok this is the mirror but it does have quotes from the doctor involved in the case, and it is he who talks about the bassinet/taking the baby away
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nhs-refused-hand-dead-babys-17795076.amp

Sorry everyone re: about the EU card.... I had a brain fart and mis-read that bit!

Then I'm very puzzled by why the parents haven't managed to get their countries NHS equivalent to sort this out with the NHS. This can be done if you travel without one or don't have one when traveling.

My sis worked in the Paediatrics unit of a large hospital just outside London about 7 years ago. She worked in the admin unit for donkeys years and they were always sorting out paperwork for the kids and parents when they were from the EU and had either forgotten to get a card or didn't have it with them.

It could sometimes take months to sort out when the child stayed long term but it was just a paperwork exercise that needed to be done (crossing ts and dotting i's). It was normally sorted out with confirmation of residency from the EU country and getting the EU MS to settle any bills etc (that bit took the longest)).

But the moment they got the confirmation that the person was a resident in the EU country concerned then it was a kind of an non issue and merely a paperwork thing so everything got tied up and the right people were billed (if need be).

So I'm really baffled at this. Unless, there is more to the sorry than we are being told.

If it happened in reverse looks like you would be fine: (info is from MSE site)
What happens if I fall ill in Europe and DON'T have an EHIC?

If you are eligible for an EHIC but don't have one and fall ill while travelling in a country where the EHIC is valid, you can be issued with a Provisional Replacement Certificate. You'll need to organise this BEFORE treatment except in medical emergencies

A PRC proves you're entitled to an EHIC and can be used to get you the same cover - but applying for one can be a laborious process. You or someone acting on your behalf will have to ring the Department for Work and Pension's Overseas Healthcare Team on +44 (0)191 218 1999 - frustratingly, you can only do this between 8am and 5pm, Monday to Friday

I heard of a case (one of many similar) in America where a British couple had a premature baby but the ICU would have cost them £1million. They had to find a million quid or let the baby die.

They chose to go to the US with no medical insurance. That is entirely their responsibility.

As for the couple in the UK, no matter what the financial situation there is no reason for keeping the body as long as the parents had somewhere to take the body so it was treated respectfully and not taken home on the ferry or whatever. I was asked by the NHS to make sure I had a suitable means of transporting a body that I was collecting and they insisted on seeing it first because no undertaker was involved with the NHS.

but it does have quotes from the doctor involved in the case,

That article reads like Dr Rylands was working at the hospital when it (allegedly) happened not that he was actually involved.

The story doesn't make sense. The Dr says that usually the baby is presented in a basinet for the parents to take home prior to burial and it was this that was refused in this case. But how could the parents take the baby home unless they could pay to have the body repatriated? That would be down to them to pay for undertakers to repatriate the body, not the NHS so what is missing from this story?

The issue is what happens if you have for example a woman who has been trafficked and falls pregnant? Giving birth is a particularly difficult area which if health care is withheld has massive consequences to a minor which the state has a basic duty of care to regardless of the nationality.

This case is particularly poignant because the baby died. Thus the NHS has a duty of care to that woman because of that situation which could cause active harm and they know this.

There has to be room for discretion even if the parents should have paid. That baby ends up with no dignity in death as a result of jobsworth beaucracy.

It's telling that people are only seeing this in terms of finance and not humanity.

Surely it's more likely that there were no proper arrangements in place for proper storage and repatriation. So the only thing the hospital can do is keep the baby. Until suitable arrangements are made.

If the NHS waived their costs out of the kindness of their little hearts where was the body being released to? And how was that body getting back to it's parents home country?

Repatriation isn't essential. You could arrange for a religious service in a church from your home faith for example, or to have the baby cremated here. They could have driven the baby home even - not ideal, but what about this situation is?
I am sure with the benefit of hindsight they wish they had handled things differently. I'm sure most of their tears are reserved for the lost child though not the bill, but it does rub salt into the wounds. Of all the unnecessary things the nhs pays for, returning a baby to its grieving parents would hardly be the worst, would it?

No, summer the parents travelled without insurance. Not the baby. Punishing the baby for the mistakes of the parents is wildly unethical.

@Imnobody4 I would have a close look at what happens in other countries.... in many places (even in the EU) you wouldn't even be admitted to hospital without being charged or proving you could pay.

I agree with badcat
This is horrible and I feel for those parents but travelling abroad with no insurance and no means to pay for healthcare when you are not entitled to it for free is irresponsible, especially if pregnant.
Nobody deserves this outcome but it is partly the parents fault