Medical Expenses: Brother Very Ill in Thailand

silvercar

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

silvercar wrote:

What I don't understand is if the brother has needed a tracheotomy for quite some time, why they are not already dead.

The brother is probably on ICU with a breathing tube in his mouth attached to the ventilator. That's done as an emergency when the person cant breathe on their own.

The tracheostomy is done later as a non-emergency because its a better solution long term for somebody on a ventilator.

Thanks for the explanation, but I didn't ask that question. Someone is playing around with the quote button.

Red-Squirrel_2

silvercar wrote: »

Thanks for the explanation, but I didn't ask that question. Someone is playing around with the quote button.

I have no idea how that happened!

MothballsWallet

elsien wrote: »

I'm sure Thailand must have procedures in place for people who don't have a next of kin. Might be worth seeing if you can check on an expat forum.
That does seem to be quite unhelpful of the foreign office.
I wouldn't sign something if I didn't know what it was.

If your brother needs support with breathing then he's in for the long haul.
What happens if he's ready to leave hospital but still needs some form of care? Only you can decide what level of involvement you want, how you will feel if you do/don't take action and the implications. But you do need more information in order to do so. Thai embassy? The British consulate in Thailand?

In my experience, the Foreign Office are kind of stupid and unreliable I'm afraid.

gilett

MothballsWallet wrote: »

In my experience, the Foreign Office are kind of stupid and unreliable I'm afraid.

I suppose you only need to look at the previous foreign secretary real roflol :eek:

unholyangel

gilett wrote: »

Has it occurred to you the jailed brother might have asked the foreign office to contact his family in the uk because he knows he's gravely ill and wants them to help him?

Has it occurred to you that if the brother was awake and able to give the brothers details to FO, he would also be able to consent to his own surgery? Unless its only about whos paying - in which case the brother giving OPs details to the foreign office would be even worse.

Btw, you still haven't answered my question on why you're calling the OP cold & callous but not the estranged brother - who was the one who decided that family matters so little to him, that he cut off all contact just because they didn't do exactly what he wanted regardless of cost or burden to themselves.

I'd do a lot for family, even those I don't particularly like. But how much I'd be willing to do would depend - on their circumstances, my circumstances, what they need help with and how they had behaved previously. There certainly is a line they can cross.

Sunny_Intervals wrote: »

I used a professional translation service when I needed something properly translated. I wouldn't chance Google translate or asking some guy in a restaurant for something this important.

I think the issue they're trying to highlight is that legalese can have very specific meanings and that even if you get someone to provide a reliable interpretation of the language in it, it won't give you a reliable interpretation of the law in it.

gilett

unholyangel wrote: »

Has it occurred to you that if the brother was awake and able to give the brothers details to FO, he would also be able to consent to his own surgery? Unless its only about whos paying - in which case the brother giving OPs details to the foreign office would be even worse.

Btw, you still haven't answered my question on why you're calling the OP cold & callous but not the estranged brother - who was the one who decided that family matters so little to him, that he cut off all contact just because they didn't do exactly what he wanted regardless of cost or burden to themselves.

I'd do a lot for family, even those I don't particularly like. But how much I'd be willing to do would depend - on their circumstances, my circumstances, what they need help with and how they had behaved previously. There certainly is a line they can cross.



I think the issue they're trying to highlight is that legalese can have very specific meanings and that even if you get someone to provide a reliable interpretation of the language in it, it won't give you a reliable interpretation of the law in it.

And you still haven't grasped the difference between 'calling' someone cold and callous, and objectively saying it 'seems' or 'I find it' cold and callous.

One is calling a specific person those exact names, the other is discribing how you feel or find a certain course of action.

missprice

gilett wrote: »

And you still haven't grasped the difference between 'calling' someone cold and callous, and objectively saying it 'seems' or 'I find it' cold and callous.

One is calling a specific person those exact names, the other is discribing how you feel or find a certain course of action.

Fine, you be generous and warm, get all the details you need. You fix it.

gilett

missprice wrote: »

Fine, you be generous and warm, get all the details you need. You fix it.

Who's being all generous and warm? lol

unholyangel

gilett wrote: »

And you still haven't grasped the difference between 'calling' someone cold and callous, and objectively saying it 'seems' or 'I find it' cold and callous.

One is calling a specific person those exact names, the other is discribing how you feel or find a certain course of action.

Don't try to detract from the issue I raised (what is this "still haven't grasped" btw....you never responded to my first post at all, much less to raise that pedantry). Unless you'd like to point out where you said you find the brother cutting off all contact for something is callous or that it seems the brother was callous in only caring about what he wanted rather than any impact it would have on the OP.

Nor have you answered why the OP would be needed to consent to the surgery if the brother was able to give OP's details to the foreign office.

gilett

unholyangel wrote: »

Don't try to detract from the issue I raised (what is this "still haven't grasped" btw....you never responded to my first post at all, much less to raise that pedantry). Unless you'd like to point out where you said you find the brother cutting off all contact for something is callous or that it seems the brother was callous in only caring about what he wanted rather than any impact it would have on the OP.

Nor have you answered why the OP would be needed to consent to the surgery if the brother was able to give OP's details to the foreign office.

I'm addressing the issue you raised. Its you who doesn't seem to want to recognise it. You said I was 'calling" the OP cold and callous, I explained the difference between making objective observations based on what we are observing from the OP ie' it seems' cold and callous, and your erroneous interpretation of 'you are' cold and callous. There's a very clear difference.

You will find numerous posts throughout this thread where I have said it 'seems' or 'feels' cold and callous. You will not find a single post where I have directly addressed the OP and 'called them' cold and callous so please don't tell porkies.

Why would I have to answer anything you say anyway? :cool: