Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Feeling very sad about decision

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Turtle_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 640 ✭✭✭Turtle_


    Hmm_Messiah wrote: »
    It is not laughably low - it is I would think above average (depending on the level of your health insurance in the first place) - my cover is €50,000.00. It is NOT intended to be full comprehensive cover when abroad.

    I'm sorry but 100k is very little when you go outside the EU. If you take seriously ill or are involved in a bad accident, you don't have any automatic right to be treated for free. If you need major surgery and spend weeks in hospital there's no way 50k or 100k will cover the costs. What if you've to be repatriated via air ambulance? Which is why I'm making the point that her cover is grossly inadequate and she needs travel insurance if she wants to go that far away, especially with a baby. FWIW, most travel insurance covers medical expenses in the millions.


  • Options
    #33
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    50k mefical cover is laughable. Anyway main objective of travel insurance is to be covered for medical emergencies. Cancelled flights and lost luggage are small sums in comparison to possible medical costs.

    As mentioned previously op, did you talk to someone who knows something about tropical diseases and risks in that part of the country? While risks are definitely higher than in Europe Brazil isn't that bad. Mortality rate of children under five is 16 per 1000 kids (4/1000 in Ireland). I imagine majority of those affect poorer population.

    Anyway I've traveled a bit around Brazil about 12 years ago and would be more worried about being mugged than getting sick especially if you stay in the cities. But there was no zica then.


  • Options
    #34
    Hmm_Messiah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,964 ✭✭✭Hmm_Messiah


    Turtle_ wrote: »
    I'm sorry but 100k is very little when you go outside the EU. If you take seriously ill or are involved in a bad accident, you don't have any automatic right to be treated for free. If you need major surgery and spend weeks in hospital there's no way 50k or 100k will cover the costs. What if you've to be repatriated via air ambulance? Which is why I'm making the point that her cover is grossly inadequate and she needs travel insurance if she wants to go that far away, especially with a baby. FWIW, most travel insurance covers medical expenses in the millions.

    you seem to be misreading what I said (or I am misreading some one else)- this is their Health Insurance cover - not travel insurance 50-100 k is the norm for health insurance


  • Options
    #35
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    Hmm_Messiah wrote: »
    you seem to be misreading what I said 9 or I am misreading some one else0 - this is their Health Insurance cover - not travel insurance 50-100 k is the norm for health insurance

    Private health insurance usually covers you for that and even there I don't know about fine print but to actually have proper medical cover then you should take out travel insurance which covers a lot higher amounts and those are needed in case of serious injuries, medically assisted flights or worse. Op has private insurance and she is advised it's not enough.


  • Options
    #36
    Turtle_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 640 ✭✭✭Turtle_


    Hmm_Messiah wrote: »
    you seem to be misreading what I said (or I am misreading some one else)- this is their Health Insurance cover - not travel insurance 50-100 k is the norm for health insurance

    I'm not misreading you, it is laughably low cover if that's all you're relying on. OP seemed to think travel insurance is unnecessary because her health insurance covers up to 100k. That's fine if you stay in the EU, otherwise it's way too low to rely on. Hence, advising the OP to take out travel insurance...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    IAO2017
    Registered Users Posts: 8 ✭IAO2017


    A month is a very long time to leave a 10 month old. I come from Nigeria (which would be similar to brazil in some ways) and I took my 9 month old baby there though the doctor advised against is due to high risk of diseases and she was too young to receive vaccines. I treated her like an egg while we were there. I wouldnt let just anyone hold her. All her bottles and utensils would only be cleaned by myself. Her food, bath, everything was done with the utmost care. Only used bottled water I was familiar with. Mosquito nets to prevent mosquito bites.etc. When we came back I took her to the doctors for tests as my doctor recommended since I told her I was definitely taking her. She was perfectly fine! It's up to you and your partner if you want to take the baby or not but it can be done! And doctors will always tell advice you in general not to travel with a baby to high risk countries. But doctors are not God. It's just what they've been taught! If your baby is well and has no health issues then he/she will be ok as long as preventative steps are taken. But I couldn't leave mine for a month at that age. It will be too much for you and the baby.


  • Options
    #38
    Hmm_Messiah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,964 ✭✭✭Hmm_Messiah


    Turtle_ wrote: »
    I'm not misreading you, it is laughably low cover if that's all you're relying on. OP seemed to think travel insurance is unnecessary because her health insurance covers up to 100k. That's fine if you stay in the EU, otherwise it's way too low to rely on. Hence, advising the OP to take out travel insurance...

    Did you read my post /

    (1) I said that the 100k quoted by the OP would not be laughable low but correct for HEALTH insurance

    (2) I then went on to express , shock at some one planning such a trip with out TRAVEL insurance .

    (3)I was replying to Turtle, not the OP, I actually QUOTED the bit I was responding to


    all very Off Topic now


  • Options
    #39
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,229 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    We took a 2 month old baby to Kenya 40-odd years ago, and had another one in Nairobi, who was then taken back to our up-country house. The two of them were exceptionally healthy and neither had any health issues till be came back to Ireland, during a warm summer, when they got endless colds etc.

    Our living conditions were pretty basic, water and milk had to be boiled, food came from a local market. There were mosquitoes, where we lived we were just above the cerebral malaria altitude, when we went down to the village they were an issue, but the only person that got bitten was me.

    There was no health care to speak of, but quite a lot of ex-pat mothers who had a good deal of experience between them, including a nurse. I don't recall any of the numerous young children having health issues while we were there (two and a half years), certainly ours didn't.


  • Options
    #40
    Turtle_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 640 ✭✭✭Turtle_


    Hmm_Messiah wrote: »
    Did you read my post /

    (1) I said that the 100k quoted by the OP would not be laughable low but correct for HEALTH insurance

    (2) I then went on to express , shock at some one planning such a trip with out TRAVEL insurance .

    (3)I was replying to Turtle, not the OP, I actually QUOTED the bit I was responding to


    all very Off Topic now

    Yeah, I know you were replying to me.. And I explained that my post was in the context of relying on it as your only cover abroad. I asked if she was sure it wasn't a million because I find it difficult to believe that someone would actually rely on such a low level of cover. You can't solely refer to my post as a standalone post when I was addressing the OP...


  • Options
    #41
    sashafierce
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭sashafierce


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    woodchuck
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭woodchuck


    sashafierce wrote: »
    OP who are you flying with, I find it hard to believe an airline wouldn't let you change flights for a fee or with a doctors letter?

    I agree it's very unusual that you can't change the flights for a fee. I know you already talked to someone on phone, but is there any chance you both got your wires crossed? See if you can find their policy or terms and conditions online and ring them back to discuss in more detail.


  • Options
    #43
    dar100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,735 ✭✭✭dar100


    A month is far far too long to leave a 10 month baby without its parents, seriously this period of time will effect the child


  • Options
    #44
    sashafierce
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭sashafierce


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #45
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    sashafierce wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    A month is a massive amount of time to be away from your parents at that age especially for a baby who is still bonding with his or her parents, can't understand the separation and has no concept of time. Emotionally it will be damaging. I wouldn't leave a child of any age for a month but especially not a young baby who needs it's parents and the continuity of care. It's also a huge ask to expect someone else to take on that responsibility for so long.


  • Options
    #46
    Cunning Stunt
    Registered Users Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭Cunning Stunt


    laurey wrote: »
    I checked flight prices to get a flight to Brazil one way and cut the first 2 weeks out so it would shorten it to 2 weeks and it's very expensive- over 1000€ a ticket.

    Seriously, I would advise you to beg steal or borrow for the 1k to get at least yourself home quicker. Then your parents could perhaps mind the baby for you.
    Its for your own peace of mind - you sound tormented.


  • Options
    #47
    Tigger99
    Registered Users Posts: 6,247 ✭✭✭Tigger99


    If you don't use the first leg of the flight your return flight will be null and void and you won't be able to use it. So buying a later one way ticket will not be the answer.

    Can you not just tell your partner that you can't do it. And if his parents are pissed off that you won't leave your baby for a month to go over on the ticket they've paid for, then they care far more about their pocket then your justifiable concerns.


  • Options
    #48
    amtc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,490 ✭✭✭amtc


    Wasn't the whole point to introduce the baby to grandparents?


  • Options
    #49
    ShoulderChip
    Registered Users Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭ShoulderChip


    amtc wrote: »
    Wasn't the whole point to introduce the baby to grandparents?

    Yes but now we have irrational panic.


  • Options
    #50
    afkasurfjunkie
    Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭afkasurfjunkie


    Bring the baby. If the grandparents can afford airfare for you all then it sounds like you won't be in that unsafe of an area.
    Take a look at the blog of that woman that went backing with her baby while on maternity leave. Travel mad mum I think it is. Babies are fairly portable at that stage. Some of the replies on this thread are a tad ott.


  • Options
    #51
    GingerLily
    Registered Users Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭GingerLily


    afkasurfjunkie wrote: »
    Bring the baby. If the grandparents can afford airfare for you all then it sounds like you won't be in that unsafe of an area.
    Take a look at the blog of that woman that went backing with her baby while on maternity leave. Travel mad mum I think it is. Babies are fairly portable at that stage. Some of the replies on this thread are a tad ott.

    I really don't think the OP should take health advice for her baby based off evidence of 1 blogger, that is more than a little ridiculous.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    ShoulderChip
    Registered Users Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭ShoulderChip


    GingerLily wrote: »
    I really don't think the OP should take health advice for her baby based off evidence of 1 blogger, that is more than a little ridiculous.

    Don't think anyone was implying that.


  • Options
    #53
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    GingerLily wrote: »
    I really don't think the OP should take health advice for her baby based off evidence of 1 blogger, that is more than a little ridiculous.

    How does any child survive in Brazil? I am not saying to ignore medical advice but some reaction here is a bit over the top. I'm pretty sure op could get advice what area to avoid and what precautions to take to minimize the risk.


  • Options
    #54
    sashafierce
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭sashafierce


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #55
    GingerLily
    Registered Users Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭GingerLily


    meeeeh wrote: »
    How does any child survive in Brazil? I am not saying to ignore medical advice but some reaction here is a bit over the top. I'm pretty sure op could get advice what area to avoid and what precautions to take to minimize the risk.

    I'm not a doctor and I don't pretend to be so I'm not going to give the OP and her baby health advice, I think she should consult another doctor and get a second medical opinion on the risks.

    Also the infant mortality rate is 5 times higher in Brazil than Ireland.


  • Options
    #56
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    GingerLily wrote: »
    I'm not a doctor and I don't pretend to be so I'm not going to give the OP and her baby health advice, I think she should consult another doctor and get a second medical opinion on the risks.

    Also the infant mortality rate is 5 times higher in Brazil than Ireland.

    It is about 12 more per 1000 kids born. I also assume it disproportionately affects poor people.


  • Options
    #57
    iguana
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 12,915 Mod ✭✭✭✭iguana


    meeeeh wrote: »
    How does any child survive in Brazil? I am not saying to ignore medical advice but some reaction here is a bit over the top. I'm pretty sure op could get advice what area to avoid and what precautions to take to minimize the risk.

    Brazil has some of the highest breastfeeding rates in the world and the rise in breastfeeding there has a direct correlation with the fall in infant mortality. A breastfed baby is protected by it's mother's adult immune system, a formula fed baby isn't. A formula fed baby may be put at risk if the water supply isn't as clean as they are used to, if there isn't the same opportunity to sterilise the formula (which is far from sterile) and the feeding equipment. Or if there isn't the same opportunity to refrigerate any pre-made formula, especially in the heat of Brazil. Again a non-breastfed baby could be at very real risk of dehydration, sodium poisoning, poisoning from water, tummy upset from a different form of milk/juice that they are used to, heatstroke when they are acclimatised to an Irish winter and moved suddenly into an equatorial climate, etc.

    A breastfed baby doesn't have any magic protection bubble but they do have a constant source of clean drinking fluid which adapts to the babies climate based needs for liquid versus food. A mild to moderate upset tummy can be treated entirely with breastmilk in most cases. At 10 months food can still be entirely replaced with breatsmilk if the baby refuses local cuisine. If absolutely necessary there is no need for any food or liquid other than breastmilk and it will always be suitable. No need to worry about how the baby will react to the water supply or local milk, etc. And of course the protection of the mother's immune system.

    Tbh, I would avoid that kind of travel with a baby of that age entirely. But if the baby is breastfed it will be significantly less risky than if the baby isn't. With the OP suggesting the option of leaving for him for a month without mentioning weaning, I'm assuming he is formula fed and tbh, that just increases the risk and hassle levels to a point where in my opinion it's really, really not worth the risk.


  • Options
    #58
    afkasurfjunkie
    Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭afkasurfjunkie


    Oh for the love of Pete don't go down the route of formula vs breastfed. The op is feeling bad enough already and that advice is not helpful in this situation.


  • Options
    #59
    Dial Hard
    Registered Users Posts: 13,526 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    afkasurfjunkie wrote:
    Oh for the love of Pete don't go down the route of formula vs breastfed. The op is feeling bad enough already and that advice is not helpful in this situation.

    That poster is an infant milk scientist, iirc and it's perfectly valid advice in this instance as it's directly relevant to the baby's immune development.

    She wasn't making any value judgements on whether or not the OP "should have" breastfed, at all.


  • Options
    #60
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    Rather than breastfeeding I would be more interested what part of country they are going too and frankly what kind of neighborhood. Airtravel is often the most dangerous part of the trip anyway and that doesn't overly matter where you are going.

    I'm sure op did her research and should do only what she feels comfortable with but accusations of being irresponsible parent if you travel to a poorer country are way over the top. Brazil is extremely diverse, going somewhere in Amazon forest will be completely different to staying in rich/middle class neighborhood in Rio which will be again completely different to staying in favela.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    iguana
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 12,915 Mod ✭✭✭✭iguana


    afkasurfjunkie wrote: »
    Oh for the love of Pete don't go down the route of formula vs breastfed. The op is feeling bad enough already and that advice is not helpful in this situation.

    It is relevant advice not judgement. Tbh, if you are reading judgement into it, that says more about your own feelings than my intention. It has been suggested repeatedly that the OP should ignore her doctor's advice 'because Brazilian babies can survive in Brazil.' Well the fact is that Brazil has an infant mortality rate 5 times higher than Ireland's. But that that rate has decreased significantly in direct correlation with increased breastfeeding rates. So method of feeding has a very, very real impact on the level of risk the baby will be exposed to. Method of feeding doesn't matter as much when you can trust the water supply, the formula supplier, the availability and reliability of sterilisation equipment. Brazil is a developing world country, so the OP can't assume that she can rely on all those variables when travelling there. It really is something that needs to be taken into consideration when travelling, especially when going outside of the first world. It's not about judgement but about practicality and the safety of the baby.


Advertisement