| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
rachndean 
Senior Member
Joined: 26 May 2008
Points: 729
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Topic: Surely we can help them out??
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 1:59pm |
Just saw this in the herald, hadnt heard anything about it until now.
I have just donated to them to hopefully get them home, surely the government can help them out somehow??? It is very sad  Link
|
 
DD Savannah 18.01.04
DS Austin 04.09.08
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
Febgirl
Senior Member
Joined: 10 August 2007
Points: 1033
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 2:46pm |
I saw that too, how stressful for the parents! I'm sure that they will get the help they need to fly back.
Still, part of me thinks who goes on an overseas holiday at 35/36 weeks pregnant without taking out travel insurance - it doesn't cost much. 
|
Two little girls under 2!
|
|
Bizzy
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: New Zealand
Points: 10974
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 3:57pm |
|
i agree febgirl, who doesnt take medical insurance out when going overseas esp while so pregnant! i feel sorry for the baby but the parents stupidity makes me go grr!
|
|
|
|
monikah
Senior Member
Joined: 30 March 2008
Location: Wellington
Points: 4085
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 4:05pm |
|
yea saw this earlier. sucks aye. im sure with all the promo the will get help. i know if we werent absolutely skint we'd help. i do agree though, thats a really dumb time to go away without life insurance but i do feel sorry for them none the less
|
|
|
|
fire_engine
Senior Member
Joined: 03 November 2007
Points: 6260
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 4:06pm |
|
Medical insurance won't cover you at that stage of pregnancy (and commercial airlines won't usually take you either). Very sad but they took the risk - I'm not wanting to sound harsh, but I'm with bizzy. (I can't be too harsh cos there's a wee baby involved and it's not his fault his parents took the risk).
|
|
Mum to two wee boys
|
|
mummy_becks
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Points: 14931
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 4:19pm |
 Bizzy wrote:
i agree febgirl, who doesnt take medical insurance out when going overseas esp while so pregnant! i feel sorry for the baby but the parents stupidity makes me go grr! |
Totally agree with that.
But I am also very silly and don't usually take out travel insurance when I go over to mum and dads.
|
|
I was a puree feeder, forward facing, cot sleeping, pram pushing kind of Mum... and my kids survived!
|
|
tropics
Senior Member
Joined: 25 February 2007
Location: New Zealand
Points: 2555
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 4:21pm |
|
Very sad, I hope the little baby gets that flight back to NZ to get the help it needs, but I agree a little bit silly travelling that late on in pregnancy for a tropical holiday to a third world country and totally crazy travelling without travel insurance!
But I do feel for them and hope they can raise the funds quickly to make sure that the lil bubs has a hope in life
|
|
|
|
my4beauties
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: NZ
Points: 6264
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 8:26pm |
|
What I don't get, is how can the hospital not be equiped to look after a month prem baby? Does that mean any baby born a month prem doesn't have a hope of survival in Samoa?
|
My babies: R (9),G (7), J (5) 
|
|
Paws
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Auckland
Points: 5860
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 8:59pm |
Flissty wrote:
Medical insurance won't cover you at that stage of pregnancy (and commercial airlines won't usually take you either). Very sad but they took the risk - I'm not wanting to sound harsh, but I'm with bizzy. (I can't be too harsh cos there's a wee baby involved and it's not his fault his parents took the risk). |
Yeah I'd be pretty surprised if insurance would cover. And recalling back to my airline days I'm sure we didn't recommend overseas travel from 36 weeks on. Even earlier for multiple pregnancy.
I hope he does get the care he needs. Poor wee bubba.
Edited by Paws
|
|
|
|
hannibal
Senior Member
Joined: 04 December 2008
Points: 611
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 October 2009 at 9:56pm |
|
Eeeee a big risk they took, hope that the poor bubs gets the help he needs really soon.
|
|
Hopes
Senior Member
Joined: 06 August 2008
Location: Waikato
Points: 4495
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 6:52am |
|
It looks like the govt's going to cover the cost. I'm very pleased for the wee baby's sake. At the same time... travelling that far pg... that was a bit of a risk!
|
|
|
|
kiwigal
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Points: 1616
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 7:36am |
Flissty wrote:
Medical insurance won't cover you at that stage of pregnancy (and commercial airlines won't usually take you either). Very sad but they took the risk - I'm not wanting to sound harsh, but I'm with bizzy. (I can't be too harsh cos there's a wee baby involved and it's not his fault his parents took the risk). |
I agree they took that risk and have deal with the consquences but in saying that I feel sorry for the wee boy.
My two kids were both born just over 35 weeks as I have trouble towards the end of pregnancies and I will not be travelling overseas where I will put my baby at risk.
|
|
lilfatty
Senior Member
Joined: 22 August 2007
Location: Waitakere
Points: 9799
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 7:53am |
|
*bangs head*
"She said she did not have travel insurance as she did not expect to go into labour so early."
Is that not the whole point of travel insurance .. ?
|
Mummy to Issy (3) and Elias (18 months)
I did it .. 41 kgs gone! From flab to fab in under a year  LFs weight blog
|
|
Paws
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Auckland
Points: 5860
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 9:14am |
lilfatty wrote:
*bangs head*
"She said she did not have travel insurance as she did not expect to go into labour so early."
Is that not the whole point of travel insurance .. ? |
Yeah but insurance is there to cover unforseen circumstances, I fully imagine that traveling at 36 weeks pregnant, the possibility of labour is not unforseen. You know you're pregnant so you know it can happen. Most insurances won't cover known medical conditions of which pregnancy would qualify as one.
|
|
|
|
kebakat
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Palmy North
Points: 10980
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 9:59am |
|
Playing devils advocate but I've never travelled with insurance. Not that I've travelled alot. But I can understand how she might think oh samoa for a few days, still a few weeks to go, its fine especially considering her first was late. No one imagines when going on a little holiday like that to prepare for a tsnami that might cause enough stress to bring on labour lol. So I think its a bit unfair to judge her like that.
|
|
Rachael21
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: New Zealand
Points: 4700
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 10:32am |
|
I also find it hard to believ Samoa can't copw with a month early baby it must have some other medical issues.
I'm with everyone else it was a silly thing to do travelling at 36 weeks and now $100,000 has to be spent on this one family when think of all the other families in Samoa that could have helped.
I'd rather donate to the Tsunami relief.
|
|
Bobbie
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: North Shore Auckland
Points: 6123
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 10:35am |
|
Having worked in an airline industry I can say nothing was more frustrating than people who didn't take out insurance and then got upset when they got sick and couldn't travel and couldn't get a refund. Like Julia said that's the whole point of insurance.
However, I think Paws is right and it wouldn't have been covered anyway.
Her argument that the last baby came late is pretty lame though. She really shouldn't have been travelling that close to her EDD.
I think it's horrible and I'm glad they're getting help but ultimately they should have been more responsible rather than just assuming a best case scenario.
|
|
|
|
Paws
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Auckland
Points: 5860
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 10:35am |
|
At the risk of being slammed, I'm not saying I don't feel sorry for her or the baby but I do still think it was a bad judgement call to travel so late regardless of the circumstances of birth of a previous child.
|
|
|
|
lizzle
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: New Zealand
Points: 8346
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 2:32pm |
|
the government has now said they will pay. Can't be bothered finding link but it's on nzherald
|
|
Paws
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Auckland
Points: 5860
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 October 2009 at 3:06pm |
|
I also read that her baby does have other issues other than being prem so that could account for the issues the hospital has in caring for him.
|
|
|
|
Surely we can help them out??
[/url]
