Medical Expenses: Brother Very Ill in Thailand

Nicki

My brother is a real c you next Tuesday who has behaved so badly to me and mine that if a hospital in Thailand phoned to ask for medical instructions from me (and payment) I’d tell them that he would want to be DNR and they should pull the plug. Like the OP’s brother, mine is absolutely the kind who would tell the hospital that I’d pick up the bill for him (whether he could afford it himself or not) despite a lengthy estrangement.

OP don’t be guilt tripped by someone who has no idea what kind of abuse you need to take from a family member to make the decision to permanently break contact. You didn’t choose this relationship and aren’t obligated in any way.

Gavin83

gilett wrote: »

I disagree.

Disagree with what? Didn't realise there was anything in my post to disagree with.

If you're prepared to destroy your life for a stranger that's your choice. Many wouldn't and that's fine.

gilett

This all sounds rather callous to me. Wouldn't it be ironic if the sibling who forced the estranged brother out of his home because they wanted their share of the cash was now forced to sell up to pay for his treatment?

He's your brother for God's sake.

missprice

gilett wrote: »

Friends and associates are not next of kin. If you are his only surviving relative or indeed legal next of kin I think you're going to struggle with this.

It sounds desperately sad. Thai authorities do not take to kindly to people out staying thier welcome and prison is not unusual.

Surely this is as good a time for reconciliation as you're ever going to get.

Nok means precisely nothing. It's not a legal construct. Shock horror you can even not have one.
It may be sad but no one made the brother live (and overstay) in Thailand. What the Thai authorities think is the brothers problem.
It's not a right to reconcile with family members, thank God.

Pollycat

gilett wrote: »

This all sounds rather callous to me. Wouldn't it be ironic if the sibling who forced the estranged brother out of his home because they wanted their share of the cash was now forced to sell up to pay for his treatment?

He's your brother for God's sake.

You may think it's callous but other posters disagree.
I really don't think you've read the OP's posts about the situation surrounding the sale of the house.
Maybe you should.

"He's your brother for God's sake".
Really?

Pollycat

gilett wrote: »

This all sounds rather callous to me. Wouldn't it be ironic if the sibling who forced the estranged brother out of his home because they wanted their share of the cash was now forced to sell up to pay for his treatment?

He's your brother for God's sake.

It wouldn't be ironic.
It would be impossible.

Nobody is going to force the OP to sell his house to pay for his brother's treatment.
The OP is not going to sign the form.


I think you may have missed this important snippet from the OP:

jsoap5 wrote: »

The FO still won't translate the consent form. So, I have told them not to consider me as 'next of kin' any longer, and not to contact me again. My brother has friends and acquaintances who could give the permission if it is absolutely necessary. Their main (sole?) concern has always been who is going to pay the medical expenses anyway.

So who do you think is going to force the OP "to sell up to pay for his treatment?"

Marvel1

gilett wrote: »

This all sounds rather callous to me. Wouldn't it be ironic if the sibling who forced the estranged brother out of his home because they wanted their share of the cash was now forced to sell up to pay for his treatment?

Not really as not going to happen.

gilett wrote: »

He's your brother for God's sake.

Your point?

moneyistooshorttomention

missprice wrote: »

Nok means precisely nothing. It's not a legal construct. Shock horror you can even not have one.
It may be sad but no one made the brother live (and overstay) in Thailand. What the Thai authorities think is the brothers problem.
It's not a right to reconcile with family members, thank God.

Absolutely:T

I always used to give a "next of kin" prior to moving elsewhere in the country.

So - even though I'm in the same country still (move from West Country to West Wales) - I no longer give a nok. Reason - I don't see the point, as my parents are now elderly and ill and living several hours travel away from me anyway.

There's been no complaints/raised eyebrows/etc from any medics for my having left the nok space on forms blank (even though I am still in my own country).

So how much more would that be the case in a foreign country...

silvercar

There's been no complaints/raised eyebrows/etc from any medics for my having left the nok space on forms blank (even though I am still in my own country).

Maybe there hasn't been an urgent need?

A close relative needed a major operation and the consultant visited the patient before the op to sign consent forms etc and insisted that he wouldn't operate without the next of kin space completed. I asked what would happen if there weren't relatives. He said that given that there were relatives he wanted it completed.

moneyistooshorttomention

silvercar wrote: »

Maybe there hasn't been an urgent need?

A close relative needed a major operation and the consultant visited the patient before the op to sign consent forms etc and insisted that he wouldn't operate without the next of kin space completed. I asked what would happen if there weren't relatives. He said that given that there were relatives he wanted it completed.

I find that odd - unless the close relative is still under 18. It's up to all adults to make their own decisions themselves and, as you say, there are indeed a lot of people who (for one reason or another) don't have a nok they can name. There are 7 million single people in Britain for a start and many of them won't have a close relative or any close relative they have is only close by "blood" and not "really close".

As one of the 7 million singles - once my parents are gone there literally won't be an nok anyway. I certainly wouldnt dream of giving my brothers contact details and wouldnt trust him to act appropriately on my behalf. I wouldnt act as his nok either (though he has a wife and adult children that could do so in his case).

That sounds like an over-cautious surgeon that was exceeding their "authority" to me and I would be investigating the possibility of an official complaint - so they didnt do that to someone else in the future.

EDIT; As a genuine question - I've always assumed that any query re nok was them saying "Who would be genuinely concerned about your welfare and want to know?". Have I been interpreting that question wrongly all these years and I shouldn't have been taking that question at face value and what they have really been asking is "Who can we grab money from for costs if it comes to it?"

It would be useful to know if I have to lie and deny having a brother - rather than saying "There is a close-by-blood relative, but he's nothing to do with me".