A family from Edinburgh is facing unimaginable distress following the severe brain injury of their matriarch during a trip to the U.S., compounded by troubling actions from their insurance company, AXA Partners. Jane Rubens, 73, was hit by an SUV on November 1, 2024, in St. Louis, Missouri, and has since remained in a coma, requiring multiple brain surgeries, including the removal of part of her skull.
The nightmare began when her daughter, Cat Rubens, claimed AXA Partners imposed a heartbreaking ultimatum after Jane’s tragic accident. They asserted Jane would need to return to the UK by the end of November or face the cancellation of her invaluable insurance policy, which covers up to £15 million of emergency medical care. Facing this threat with little time to spare—less than 24 hours to decide—Cat expressed feeling cornered by the demands of the insurance company.
Following the accident, Cat flew out to her mother’s side, attempting to navigate the complex medical situation from thousands of miles away. Her family were advised by multiple neurology experts, including Jane's treating physicians, against flying her back to the UK at this acute stage of her recovery. These medical professionals acknowledged the significant risks associated with air travel for someone with Jane's traumatic brain injury, particularly with her condition still precarious.
“I would have rather been by her bedside, speaking to her, reading to her—that kind of thing,” reflected Cat Rubens. It’s unimaginable for any child to endure such circumstances as their parent hovers between life and death, compounded by the worry of losing medical coverage.
Initially, AXA Partners issued their communications on November 24, demanding the family agree to the repatriation plan, stating they would no longer cover Jane’s expenses if they did not. Cat described the family's struggle with AXA's timeline as harrowing. “This already hellish situation has been made immeasurably worse by the approach taken by AXA Partners,” she stated, conveying immense frustration through her posts on social media.
Expert medical advice recommended delaying her repatriation until three to six months post-surgery, once Jane was more stable. A neurosurgeon explained the necessity of significant time to recuperate before considering long-haul travel, likening the situation to trying to fly with severe turbulence—extremely risky and ill-timed for the physically compromised.
Yet, AXA insisted otherwise, leading to public outrage as Cat shared her mother’s plight online, attracting considerable media attention. "We received zero empathy, customer care, or reasonableness from AXA during one of the darkest times of our lives," Cat expressed, urging for her mother's care to be prioritized over bureaucratic demands.
AMI Partners, the insurance firm, eventually responded to the mounting public pressure. They issued apologies for the distress caused by their initial demands and stated they were actively reconsidering the repatriation against the medical team’s advice. A spokesperson for AXA Partners reiterated their commitment to keeping the family updated as they worked to find the most suitable course of action moving forward.
But the emotional toll on Cat and her family has been substantial. While attempting to process the gravity of her mother’s medical emergency, Cat felt torn between being present at Jane’s hospital bedside and dealing with the insurance crisis. “This is already the worst time of my life,” she lamented, voicing the fears of potentially losing her mother.
With media coverage shining a light on their struggle, supporters began rallying around the family, sharing their own experiences with insurance companies to highlight similar frustrations. The chaos surrounding the policy has revealed not only the potential shortcomings of insurance practices but also the human side of such problems, clashing directly with medical realities and patient care.
Eventually, Cat received confirmation from AXA Partners indicating they would not move Jane this week, which temporarily alleviated some immediate pressure. Yet, she still felt uncertain about the long-term plans and expressed gratitude for the overwhelming support she received from strangers and friends alike during this tumultuous chapter.
The family hopes to continue seeking the best medical advice and pursue Jane’s eventual safe repatriation when she is truly fit to travel. By sharing their story, Cat aims to reinforce the importance of empathy and thorough communication from insurance entities during such dire circumstances. For now, their focus remains locked on their matriarch’s recovery, clinging to hope against the backdrop of uncertainty.
While the legalities and policies of insurance can become complex, the Rubens family is reminded daily how fundamentally personal these matters can be. They seek to navigate through, not just for the sake of their mother but to advocate for other families who may find themselves tangled within similar harrowing experiences. These battles often loom large, overshadowing the precious few moments available for familial connection and emotional support during health crises.
The broader discourse surrounding medical insurance and its practices may one day lead to reforms, sparked by stories like Cat’s and Jane’s. For now, the Rubens family stands resilient, steadfastly advocating for Jane’s needs as they await the day she can once again embrace them without the looming shadows of insurance bureaucracy threatening to overshadow their connectedness.
