Mother 'dies of coronavirus' after being told she was not a priority

Mother, 36, ‘dies of coronavirus’ in her flat after being told she was not a priority when she called 999

  • Kayla Williams called with fever, cough and severe pains in stomach and chest  
  • NHS staff told the mother of three to take care of herself at Peckham home 
  • Paramedic then told her husband hospital would not take the patient
  • They said she was not a priority and Ms Williams died in south London flat 
  • Coronavirus symptoms: what are they and should you see a doctor?

A mother of three has died in her flat after calling 999 and being told she was not a priority despite displaying symptoms of coronavirus.

Kayla Williams died of suspected Covid-19 at her apartment in Peckham, the day after call handlers told her to look after herself at home.

The 36-year-old’s life was cut short on Saturday, when paramedics came to her south London address.

Kayla Williams (pictured) died at home in Peckham, south London, after being told she was not a priority 

Husband Fabian Willams told the Guardian that his wife was suffering a cough, high fever and severe chest and stomach pains on Friday.

Documents have revealed that she was being treated as a suspected coronavirus case when she was told to stay at home. 

Mr Williams said: ‘I called 999 because my wife was breathless, she was vomiting and she had pains in her stomach. 

‘As I was talking to them she was getting worse and they told me to put her on the floor and to make her body flat.’

A paramedic came over to perform some tests on the patient at 8.32am but told the couple the hospital wouldn’t admit her.

Mr Williams said. ‘She told me the hospital won’t take her, she is not a priority. She did not stay very long and she went outside to write her report and posted it through the door.’

When his wife’s condition worsened the next day, Mr Williams ran her a bath and helped to dress her.

He left her to rest in the lounge and then came back to find her slumped over. ‘She was already dead,’ he told the paper.  

Source: Read Full Article

Mother, 88, wins £6m court fight against 'wealthy' son for family farm

Mother, 88, wins £6m court fight against ‘wealthy’ son who must now pay her £2.5m for her share of family farm after she insisted she would never leave her ‘darling’ daughters penniless

  • Peter Horsford’s claims were thrown out by the judge despite the High Court being told that he was ‘repeatedly promised’ the land 
  • Mr Horsford has been ordered to pay his mother Marion £2.52million for her share of the family millions 
  • He was ‘groomed’ to take over the farm since childhood and spent the ‘best years of his life’ toiling on the land, the court heard 
  • But the judge ruled in the favour of his mother, who insisted that she would never have agreed to her daughters getting nothing 

An 88-year-old mum has won a £6m court fight against her ‘wealthy’ son to make sure her ‘darling’ daughters get a share of the family millions.

Peter Horsford, 54, has been ordered to pay his mother, Marion, £2.52million for her share in the £6million family country pile, after a judge threw out his claims he was promised it would ‘all be his one day’.

Mr Horsford told London’s High Court he was ‘repeatedly promised’ the 540-acre estate in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, would be his, ever since he was a schoolboy.

He sacrificed a normal childhood spent playing with his friends to labour on the family farm, and was ‘groomed’ to take over from his dad, starting when he was given farm-themed toys as a boy, he claimed.


Peter Horsford (left), 54, has been ordered by the High Court to pay his mother Marion £2.52million for her share of the 540-acre family pile in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire

But Judge Murray Rosen QC has now ordered him to split the value of the farm with his mother, after hearing her insist she would never have agreed to her ‘darling girls’ – Mr Horsford’s sisters Helen and Liz – getting nothing while he got the lot.

Mr Horsford had told the judge he spent the ‘best years of his life’ toiling on the land and, after a golfing accident in 1997, even decided to have his eye removed so that he could get back to the farm as soon as possible.

He claimed his elderly mother ‘reneged on her lifetime of assurances’ after she spilt from his dad in 2011, then retired from the family farming partnership in December 2016, asking for over £2.5million from her son for her share, plus around £23,000 in past profits.

Mr Horsford said he should not have to pay a penny for her share, due to the promises made to him, claiming that if he had to pay up the farm might need to be sold, taking away his ‘life’s work’.

But Judge Rosen ruled in favour of the mother, saying that while she had said in the past that she might leave him her share, she had never promised to do so and entries in her diary showed she had ‘wanted fairness between her three children.’

Millionaire Mr Horsford had already become ‘a wealthy man’ through his hard work on the farm and ‘his parents’ generosity’ without getting his mother’s slice of the farm for nothing on top, the judge added.

Mr Horsford had insisted it was always his parents’ intention that he would inherit the entire family holding, sited around College Farm and Whitleather Lodge Farm, near Huntingdon.

He already owns £2.25million Whitleather Lodge Farm, having been gifted the farmhouse and an acre by his mum, then having bought his sisters out of the surrounding land for about £100,000.

But he insisted that all the land attached to neighbouring College Farm should also be his by right.

Marian, who split up from Mr Horsford’s father in 2011, denied promising him her share of the farm and argued that the work he did as a child was normal for a farm boy.

Mr Horsford’s father, Davis, is in no position to clarify what was said in the past, because he is now suffering from dementia, the court heard.

Stephen Jourdain QC, for Marian, said she accepted that in the past there was a ‘family understanding’ that Mr Horsford would probably inherit his parents’ farming interests.

But this was never ‘set in stone’ and he was always likely to have to pay his sisters something for this windfall, the barrister said.

Judge Rosen, giving his ruling, said he was ‘dealing with half a century of family history’ and ‘questions as to the partnership and of fairness and equality as between the three siblings.’

‘Various disputes… have driven this family apart,’ he added.

‘Peter’s case – that the promise was made – stresses that he “grew up on” it, and it was a constant theme in his discussions with the family.

‘The farm would be handed over to him as his inheritance and to do with as he pleased.

‘It is said that this understanding was also communicated to and readily understood by other members of the family.’

But he added: ‘Much of this however misses the crucial distinction between promises and mere statements of intention.’

Marian’s diary entries, the judge said, showed that in earlier years she had expected Mr Horsford to inherit but had always wanted to be fair to all three children.

‘I cannot stop thinking about my darling girls,’ she wrote at one point, with the judge finding that she never lost sight of her ‘equality objective’ with regard to her daughters.

In her evidence, Liz had told the court: ‘Mum had always felt that her own parents had not treated her the same as her two sisters and she was generally keen to try and make things as fair and equal as possible between the three of us.’

Mr Horsford insists he was ‘groomed’ to take over from his father and even opted to have an eye removed following a golfing accident to get back to his farm as soon as possible

Mr Horsford had claimed Marian was so well-off she did not need to be compensated when she retired as a partner from the farm, the judge said.

However, by 2012, she had split up with Davis and ‘was very worried about money,’ he continued.

‘Marian made it clear that she considered herself entitled to leave the partnership and be paid her share, and to leave her interest in the farm to her daughters,’ he said.

‘No-one could reasonably have thought that previous comments about testamentary intentions would be binding or remain applicable.

‘There was nothing unconscionable about Marian seeking and obtaining the right to retire.

‘I am wholly unsatisfied that any promise was made to Peter of the sort which he claims to have relied on, as regards his inheriting the farm or their shares in it.’

He also rejected Mr Horsford’s argument that his work on the farm since he was a boy had been to his own detriment.

Marian had told the court Mr Horsford ‘profited immensely as a result of his decision to go into farming…and to farm as a member of the partnership.’

She told the judge she gave him the farmhouse and land where he lives, now worth over £2million, paid for him to take a trip to Australia and gifted him £43,000.

‘Peter says all of these and more arose from natural love and affection and did not result from his work on the farm and should thus be regarded as a separate matter,’ the judge said.

‘He benefited, as his sisters were also intended to, from his parents’ generosity and regard for their farm, family and future.

‘He worked hard and contributed to the same cause. In context, his efforts to that end were and are not to be regarded as detrimental to him.’

The judge said that, by 2012, Mr Horsford was a ‘wealthy man’,w ith a farmhouse and land of his own worth £2.25million, plus his share of the £6million family farm, additional income and a salary.

‘Peter had benefited substantially from the choice he made to farm with his parents and all that followed,’ the judge said.

Saying it was not his job to criticise either mum or son, the judge added: ‘This court is not an arbiter of moral outrage, especially in complex family relations.

‘The task of the court is to do no more than decide the issues according to law and fairness.

‘It does not serve to punish the bad son or mother, or the bad brother or sister.

‘On the contrary it is to be hoped that when the legal issues are resolved those involved may ultimately find some measure of mutual empathy and compassion in order to effect at least some small repair to their family.’

The judge also accepted Marian’s valuation of her share as being worth £2.52million.

Mr Horsford is now also likely to face a large lawyers’ bill for the case, although the issue of costs was not dealt with in the judgment.

 

Source: Read Full Article

Mother says son's red hair makes people ask if she's kidnapped him

Black woman says she’s been accused of KIDNAPPING her own son, seven, because of his flame-red hair – and even he’s asked if she’s his ‘real mother’

  • Mother-of-three Ebony Lumpkin, 30, from Virginia Beach, says people are constantly questioning whether son Matthew, 7, is adopted or if she’s ‘his nanny’ 
  • One woman even accused her of kidnapping Matthew because his bright red curls make him look so different to his parents and siblings 
  • Ebony and Matthew’s father, Patrick Tebbe, have no red-heads in their family
  • Even Matthew has asked if he’s biologically related to the rest of his family  
  • Now, in a bid to make Matthew feel more at ease, Ebony and her eldest son, Adam, have dyed their own hair red to help him feel more similar to his family 

A black mother-of-three has revealed how people struggle to believe that her red-haired son is biologically hers – and once even faced police questioning after a stranger accused her of kidnapping him.  

Ebony Lumpkin, 30, from Virginia Beach, Virginia, is constantly being peppered with inquisitive questions by strangers about her relationship to Matthew, seven.

Although the family ‘mostly get compliments’, they also face a barrage of queries about whether the schoolboy has different genetic heritage to his mother and father. The family have trawled back through their family trees but say they can find no evidence of a previous red-head. 

So constant have the questions begun that Ebony, a Navy veteran, has recently dyed her hair red in a bid to make Matthew feel more comfortable after he was taunted by  his peers.

Scroll down for video  

Ebony Lumpkin, 30, from Virginia, pictured with her son Matthew, seven. His flame-colored hair means people constantly ask Ebony whether she’s adopted him, or make the assumption that she’s his nanny  

Matthew (pictured with his older brother Adam and younger sister) gets upset by the constant references to his hair – with even classmates questioning whether Ebony is really his mother 

Patrick Tebbe, Matthew’s father, (pictured far right with sons Matthew, left, and Adam) also doesn’t have red hair in his family – the couple checked back five generations

The mother-of-three says she ‘understands’ that it’s rare ‘to see a black mother with a white child’, saying ‘I was shocked when I first saw him too!’

Here I am! Despite neither Matthew’s mother and father having red hair, doctors think they both carry the MC1R gene, which influences hair color

Research shows that both Ebony and Matthew’s father, Patrick Tebbe, 32, must carry the MC1R gene which is linked most strongly to red hair.

Ebony said of her constant conversations: ‘A five-minute trip with Matthew always turned into an hour one as people are in awe with him.

‘They are always complimenting his hair but then look twice at me and make speculations. I can’t count how many times I have had to explain I’m his mother, not nanny nor is he adopted.

She added: ‘I understand it is rare to see a black mother with a white child who has red hair – I was shocked when I first saw him too!

‘But I would prefer it if they were mindful about how they ask – especially in front of Matthew.

‘It is disheartening to hear and makes him question his role in the family. Children are volatile and care about what others think – it is very confusing for him when strangers question if I am his mother.

‘He once spent a whole week asking every red-haired woman if they were his ‘real mummy’ after schoolkids told him I am not.

‘Another time a woman rang the police as she assumed, I had kidnapped Matthew from a white lady who had helped me put on his shoe in the supermarket.

Confusion: The 30-year-old says she son gets perplexed when people want to chat about his hair – and describes how one woman called the police, assuming he’d been kidnapped after spotting mother-and-son in the supermarket together 

Upside: Matthew’s unique hair color has seen him scouted by a model agency 

Despite not finding red-haired genes in their respective family trees, Ebony and Patrick much have a hidden, recessive red-headed gene to explain Matthew’s red hair

Adam, Matthew’s older sibling, can feel left out from all the attention that his brother gets, says Ebony – saying the decision to dye their hair a red hue has helped them all to bond

Ebony revealed the family had been to the doctors that day and had Matthew’s birth certificate – but added that even the police officer didn’t believe her at first.

She explained: ‘It was the most terrifying thing I have ever experienced.’

However, it isn’t always negative remarks, Matthew has racked up over 3000 followers – who love his hair – on Instagram.

She added: ‘We have learnt to embrace the prolonged trips to the store as the positive comments outweigh the negative.

THE GENETICS: HOW  DO TWO DARK-HAIRED PARENTS CONCEIVE A BABY WITH RED HAIR 

The gene for a particular feature comes in several alternative versions called ‘alleles’. Some are dominant and some recessive. 

Dominant genes are likely to control the outcome of your inherited trait, while recessive genes may skip a generation or two before their impact is made known.

For example, if you inherit an allele for dark hair from either or both parents then it is likely your hair colour will be dark. However, it is possible to have two parents with black hair who conceive a red-headed child.

The recessive gene in Patrick and Ebony’s genetic history has passed down to younger son Matthew, but not their two other children

This is because both the mother and father carried a hidden, recessive red-headed gene which they inherited from their own parents or grandparents. You hand on only one of your two, at random, to the next generation.

As red is recessive it will skip a generation if a dominant dark gene is present and can appear unexpectedly in the next – if both parents hand over their recessive red gene, not the dark one, to that particular child.

 Likewise, if both parents carry the same recessive gene, say for blond hair, they can have a blondhaired child even if they are both dark.

‘Matthew loves the attention and has even been scouted by a modelling agency. Adam often feels left out which is why he suggested we dye our hair red to match Matthew’s.

‘It touched my heart to hear he wanted to be like his little brother, and it shows they both appreciate his unique look.

Matthew photographed as a tot – his stunning ginger curls have seen him constantly asked questions about his unique locks

‘When Matthew saw the grand reveal, he was thrilled, and it was one of the greatest joys of my life.’

After looking through five generations of her family and Matthew’s dad, Patrick Tebbe’s, 32, but there’s no sign of red hair which prompted Ebony to research her heritage further.

She adds: ‘Many people say ‘he must get the hair from his dad’s side’ but none of his family have red hair.

‘The research I found said both parents must carry the MC1R gene for this to happen to one of their kids.

‘I would like other people to be knowledgeable and learn about genetics before making rude remarks.’

Source: Read Full Article

Mother who stockpiled loo roll finds children had thrown them in bath

Wiped out! Mother who stockpiled 18 toilet rolls during coronavirus panic-buying finds her children have thrown them all in the bath

  • Mother stockpiled 18 toilet rolls for her family amid coronavirus panic-buying
  • Yet her children decided to empty them in the bath and create a soggy mess
  • The incident was shared on Twitter by Ed Cumming, from Hampshire, today 
  • Coronavirus symptoms: what are they and should you see a doctor?

A mother who stockpiled 18 toilet rolls amid coronavirus-fuelled panic-buying has sent Twitter wild after discovering her children had thrown them all in the bath.

With supermarket shelves running bare following the increase of Covid-19 cases, the anonymous parent decided to buy 18 rolls of toilet paper.

But the mother was beside herself after leaving the paper unattended, only to find her children had decided to give them a bath, along with many of their toys.

The incident was shared on Twitter by Ed Cumming, from Hampshire, who posted a photo of the soggy mess today.

A mother who had stockpiled 18 toilet rolls amid coronavirus-fuelled panic-buying has sent Twitter wild after discovering her children had thrown them all in the bath (pictured)

The incident was shared on Twitter by Ed Cumming (above), from Hampshire, who posted a photo of the soggy mess today

The tweet was quickly inundated with thousands of likes and hundreds of comments, with social media users seeing the funny side (pictured)

He captioned the image: ‘My friend bought 18 loo rolls and her kids put them all in the bath.’

The tweet was quickly inundated with thousands of likes and hundreds of comments, with social media users seeing the funny side.

One person commented: ‘I literally GASPED when I saw that,’ while another said: ‘Kids gotta love them.’

A third social media user joked: ‘Throw some pasta into that and it’d be a sure fire quarantine kit.’ 

Social media users (above) commented on the post and were amused by the shocking incident

However, some weren’t impressed with the stockpiling, with one person writing: ‘Karma. Just hope the weak and vulnerable haven’t missed out owing to her selfishness.’

A customer carries several packs of toilet roll in this stock image. It comes as people stockpile essentials amid coronavirus panic

However, some weren’t impressed with the stockpiling, with one person writing: ‘Karma. Just hope the weak and vulnerable haven’t missed out owing to her selfishness.’

As the number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the UK has risen above 1,000, panicked Brits have stripped shelves across Britain bare of essentials, including toilet paper.

Supermarkets cracked down on what shoppers can purchase as panic about the coronavirus epidemic created wide-spread stockpiling.

The chaos saw people scrabbling to load up with loo rolls, long-life milk and pasta in a bid to prepare for the worst.

Customers are pictured above in Savers, north London panic-buying toilet rolls in a bid to stockpile items


One woman, left, is seen handling almost 20 rolls of loo roll in the north London Savers, while shoppers are seen lining up to pay at an Aldi in Liverpool, right

Empty hand wash and toiletry shelves are pictured above in Tesco in Surrey Quays Shopping Centre in London

Sainsbury’s – which has a five-product limit on certain items – emailed millions of its customers yesterday to urge them not to stockpile and insisting there were enough supplies of food and essential items for ‘everyone’.

Tesco – Britain’s biggest supermarket – has rationed the sale of anti-bacterial products, dried pasta, tinned vegetables, toilet paper and tissues to five packs at a time starting online on Sunday morning and in stores on Saturday afternoon.

Waitrose has introduced a limit to products – including hand sanitizer – that can be bought online. 

In Boots, bottles of children’s paracetamol Calpol are being sold at only one at a time.   

Yesterday, a young mother in Glasgow was left in tears after not finding baby milk for her newborn, who was just three days old, Glasgow Live reported.

One customer said: ‘I spoke to a young guy who told me that a woman with a three day old baby was in tears because she couldn’t find powdered milk, it’s just outrageous.’ 

Source: Read Full Article

Baby giggles as his mother counts out spoonfuls of powdered milk

Magic formula? Baby giggles hysterically as his mother counts out spoonfuls of powdered milk

  • Eight-month-old Jack Sutherland is carried by his mother Lily, 21, as she counts
  • When Lily says a number as she dumps out spoonful, Jack can’t help but giggle 
  • Lily lets out a laugh at her son’s cheeky antics, filmed by his father Jack, 28

This is the adorable moment a baby couldn’t stop laughing as his mother counted spoonfuls of powdered milk.

The clip, taken in Fleetwood, Lancashire, shows eight-month-old Jack Sutherland laughing hysterically as his mother Lily, 21, counts the spoonfuls at dinner time.

In the video Jack is carried by his mother as she spoons the powder into a plastic container.


This is the adorable moment a baby couldn’t stop laughing as his mother counted spoonfuls of powdered milk in Fleetwood, Lancashire

Eight-month-old Jack Sutherland laughs hysterically as his mother Lily, 21, counts the spoonfuls at dinner time. The clip was filmed by his father Jack, 28 (pictured together)

Every time Lily says a number, Jack can’t help but giggle. 

As the little boy laughs when his mother counts ‘four’, Lily chuckles at her son’s cheeky antics.

After laughing, Jack stares intently at the formula, waiting for another spoonful to land.

The baby’s father Jack, 28, said: ‘We laughed at his laugh and reaction and don’t actually know what he was laughing at so much.

‘We got lovely comments from people who’ve seen the video, saying how it cheered some people up or made their day.’ 

Every time Lily says a number as she spoons the powder into a plastic container, Jack can’t help but giggle


After laughing, Jack stares intently at the formula, waiting for another spoonful to land. As the little boy laughs when his mother counts ‘four’, Lily lets out a giggle at her son’s cheeky antics

Source: Read Full Article