Should cruise ships have lifeguards ???

I think the quote at the end of the article sums it up best

“It takes both the parents and the cruise lines working together to make sure cruises are safe,” he said, adding that cost should not be a factor in the decision to employ lifeguards. “I think some of the decision-makers are looking at the bottom line, and that is not in everyone’s best interest.”

In that case then I do say yes, there should be lifeguards around any pool that has open access for children. Parents need to be diligent of course too.

My opinions.

Best-

Steve

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but legally speaking, having lifeguards by the pools "may" both give parents and others false sense of security and assume a defacto responsibility for guest safety by the line.

On Crown Princess, I noticed pool "monitors" who seemed to be casually watching but never seemed to intervene; this may be an option for RCI.

My kids are teens and we have had a "no swim without mom or dad" rule since our first cruise on Mariner when they were grade school age.

I would offer that any of the large ships, especially with H2O Zones, should have guards or at least monitors. Smaller ships like Radiance can probably do without. I'm sure this will be on the executive meeting agenda in the morning.

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

Had there been lifeguards on these cruise ships, I think it's safe to say that many of these tragic incidents would have not occurred.

But there are pools everywhere, resorts, hotels...even the neighbors back yard. Many, without "lifeguards". As parents, we must be vigilant, and that is the bottom line. Should RCI chose to add them, or any cruise line for that matter, I would welcome that decision. Any additional safeguards that could potentially save the life of a child should be applauded.

That said, it changes nothing for me. My daughter has been thru the entire Red Cross program of swim classes, yet I still never take my eyes off of her when she is in a pool....lifeguard or not....

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app

Fear that lifeguards would give a false sense of safely.

Best for parents to carefully watch their children when they are in ANY pool.

LuLu

I think having lifeguards might backfire. Some parents would of course continue to keep a close eye on their children but many more would leave the babysitting to the lifeguard. There's a false sense of security in the idea that a lifeguard is on duty. They are not infallible. Not having lifeguards puts the responsibility where it should be - on the parent.

I think having lifeguards might backfire. Some parents would of course continue to keep a close eye on their children but many more would leave the babysitting to the lifeguard. There's a false sense of security in the idea that a lifeguard is on duty. They are not infallible. Not having lifeguards puts the responsibility where it should be - on the parent.

Totally agree with you!

LuLu

Over the last few years, I have read posts describing pros and cons on this issue. As I posted last year after the drownings on the Norwegian Breakaway, I have truly had mixed feelings about this issue and most certainly understand parental responsibility, which many posters who do not support having lifeguards highlight.

When my now adult daughter was a child, the pools on ships were basically a water-filled rectangle and you could be standing right next to your child every moment. There was nowhere else for them to go in and around the pool. She would get out of the pool and jump in right where I was standing in the pool. Over and over. That was it. Nothing else to get her attention.

Now I sometimes watch the kids' pools on a variety of ships-especially those ships that cater to families with children-and they are truly terrifying. There is such a dizzying array of different pools, water features, slides, buckets of water, loud music, events, and entertainment. A recipe for disaster, I think.

Kids literally get hyperactive in that environment and it doesn't take much of a distraction-yours or theirs-to lose them in the crowd, especially if you have more than one or two. And unlike at community pools with lifeguards, there are no break periods, like 10 minutes out of the pool each hour to give parents a quick break or get the kids settled down, go to the bathroom or get an ice cream.

It only takes a distraction for a minute and if there is no lifeguard specifically looking at the bottom of a crowded pool, it could be too late.

I work for a city in south Florida, and it would never occur to us to open a pool to children without lifeguards. Yes, parents should be the primary caretakers. Yes, we also have signs.

But I'm keenly aware every time a ship returns to port in south Florida because of the drowning or near drowning of a child. It's tragic. This system is not just working.

I believe it's time to follow the Disney Model and assign lifeguards to these ship pools. And then go ahead and keep the 'swim at your own risk' signs. But those signs alone are just not enough.

My prayers are with this family and others who have experienced this tragedy in the past.

Maria

I absolutely think there should be pool monitors or life guards. There should still be a 'swim at your own risk' sign, but lifeguards at Disney resorts do ALOT to keep the peace and make sure everyone follows the rules. Following the rules alone (minimized horseplay, no running etc) would go a long way to improving things. Whether it would have helped the most recent incident, I don't know - but it wouldn't have HURT the situation any more!

I do think that it may be important to give them 'monitor' titles to reduce the false sense of security factor. We are heading on Navigator with our 4 and 8 year olds in February - and while they are actually both established swimmers in our home pool - they have been read the riot act about exactly how important pool safety on a ship is!!

My other gripe is that the pools at DisneyWorld/Disneyland all have free life vests for use at the pool. My 4 year old loves to wear them because they are from the hotel - it's going to be a drag to bring something from home (we will do it of course - but it's terrible to lug it around wet after a swim!). I have been looking but it doesn't seem like you can borrow these onboard?? (If I a, wrong - let me know!)

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Looking at it from a liability point of view; if the cruise line provides life guards, does that not then open the cruise line up for more liability? What if a parent let's their child go to the pool but doesn't keep an eye on them; and something happens and the life guard does their best but the child is injured or dies

At that point, the family can argue that the cruise line is liable for that child's injury or death because they provided a life guard. If there is no life guard, then it is the parent's responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article5418117.html

No! All kids who can walk should know how to swim. Parents need to be responsible for their own kids. If their kids cannot swim, then they need to be kept away from the pools, or only allowed in the pools when the parent is with them.

A parent or parents can easily keep an eye on their kids. A lifeguard cannot possibly watch dozens of kids at the same time. Remember, the Oasis/Allure have 6 pools, plus many hot-tubs. There is no way a lifeguard or even a few lifeguards can keep watch over every person in every water area. There is really no reason for kids who can walk to not know how to swim. Low cost or free lessons are available in every city.

One major problem on cruise ships is too many in the pools. We went on a Disney cruise with our grandson and even though he is an excellent swimmer and there were lifeguards, we brought him out of the pool on many occasions as there were too many in for safety.

There needs to be a set number allowed and this adhered to. The big problem is who takes the responsibility of not allowing more into crowded pools? Just like people saving sunbeds, pool attendants tend 'not to see' as they could be involved in arguments with passengers.

Management should take responsibility for safety rules - not guidelines! - and ensure our children are kept safe. Parents, of course, also cannot defer their responsibilities to others. Even on holiday they are parents.

Another issue is which ships/cruises do you put lifeguards on, some have virtually no kids, should the lines have to pay a guard for those.

As an aside I can't see how have a lifeguard on duty could increase liability for a lawsuit, but some results in the USA really do make me scratch my head.

 

As an aside I can't see how have a lifeguard on duty could increase liability for a lawsuit, but some results in the USA really do make me scratch my head.

That is the problem. People are 'sue' happy. No personal accountability. Always has to be someone else's fault. Usually that 'someone' has deep pockets. (Hello McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit!)

I agree with the sentiments that something needs to be done. I do not think lifeguards are the solution. Parents will leave their kids (more than they do now) to do their own things due to the 'free babysitter'.

I have not been on Oasis and am not familiar with this 'wave' pool/spinning pool/circular pool. Maybe a 'child-proof' gate is necessary to keep wandering kids safe?

Parents should be held responsible for safe guarding their own children!

I think yes, however I believe that parents are ultimately the ones who should be supervising their children.

Too often children seem to be left to their own devices on cruise ships, and that's sometimes down to poor parenting. I do think however that the cruise ship has a responsibility to oversee the general safety of passengers around water as accidents can and do happen. Just because a child may be unfortunate in having parents who don't take their responsibilities seriously enough, that child (or even an adult for that matter) deserves to have every possible chance of surviving an unfortunate accident.

There will also be perfectly good parents, who for one reason or another may not be the best people to react quickly in a crisis. For those reasons, it would be a yes from me.

Yes.

And, not just because of the risk to children, but also to adults.

Having a trained/certified responder present is not a guarantee that an event will never happen, they may be the difference between an incident of risky behavior and a terrible tragedy.

Whether an attendant is, or is not present, the final responsibility for safety falls on each person or to their parent/guardian, for those incapable of exercising judgement.

Interesting variety of views. Not sure exactly how I stand on this. Maybe on Freedom class or larger where there is a dedicated children's pool, a lifeguard at the children's pool wouldn't be such a bad idea. But most ships pools just aren't that large. And there is usually a number of people in the pool. Obviously that doesn't always help. But one of the common points is that a parent may lose sight of a child in the crowded pool if he or she turns away for a moment. I only wonder how a single lifeguard is expected to keep an eye on every child in a crowded pool if a parent can't keep an eye on a single child. Most pools put a lifeguard in a high stand to monitor the entire pool from a higher vantage point. Where would that stand be located on Oasis which has a large pool with multiple objects for the kids to play with.

My gut feeling is that parents just need to be vigilant and responsible for their own children. If a parent can't supervise his or her child effectively, then they should take the child out and only let the child go into the pool with them. I think that the comments in the article posted is simply setting up for the lawsuit that will follow. I agree with the posters who say that we, as a society, want to blame everyone but ourselves for our own failures. I think that is the reason for the call for lifeguards. A cruise ship has a number of hazards. My wife slipped on the pool deck last year and dislocated her collarbone. We neither sued, plan to sue, nor expect any compensation (other than any medical costs not covered by our insurance). It occurred due to a slick spot on the deck probably caused by spilled tanning lotion. Just one of those things that can happen. A ship is dynamic and can take an odd roll with no warning. Deck areas can become slippery. Stairwells can be hazardous due to motion, etc. I see it as a risk I take to enjoy cruising.

It's sort of like someone drinking too much and falling overboard then blaming the cruise line for not monitoring the passenger's liquor intake. IMHO it's our responsibility to take care of ourselves.

My DH and I just returned from a Christmas cruise on another line but the problem is the same. Children are left to play in the pool while the parents drink at the bar or read in the shade. There are too many children that their parents feel they can swim so no problem. But with the jumping and running around, it is an accident waiting to happen. There should be monitors just to keep the children safe. Parents feel they are on vacation and they forget they have the responsibility still to watch their children. Too bad about this little boy. We pray for a good outcome.

Eileen

Let's put the responsibility where it belongs..on the parents/guardians..as someone previously stated, it would give a somewhat false sense of security since some parents would be even more unlikely to watch their own child, feeling that the lifeguard will do it for them...then sue if something happens. There are beaches in Florida that don't have lifeguards and you swim at your own risk. It is still the parents responsibilty to watch their children.

Let's put the responsibility where it belongs..on the parents/guardians..as someone previously stated, it would give a somewhat false sense of security since some parents would be even more unlikely to watch their own child, feeling that the lifeguard will do it for them...then sue if something happens. There are beaches in Florida that don't have lifeguards and you swim at your own risk. It is still the parents responsibilty to watch their children.

Exactly! When my kids were little and we went to any pool whether it be at a resort or Typhoon Lagoon at WDW which has a BIG wave pool, they never left my side. I would stay IN THE WATER with them not sit in a chair nearby. Parenting doesn't stop the second you walk onto the cruise ship. Too many parents seem to have a false sense of security when cruising.

I pray this little boy recovers. The parents will most likely file a lawsuit against RCCL instead of accepting the blame. Terrible thing to have to live with but parents need to watch their own children at all times, especially a four year old.

Lots of good and constructive comments. Let's just be cognizant that in the Oasis incident over the weekend, the little boy wandered away from his mother and she was frantically looking for him when he was found in the water. Unless this has happened to you (my son and I became separated in a crowd after a show at Disney World several years back and I was terrified for over 30 minutes), keep judgements on this poor family neutral until more information surfaces.

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

While I would support lifeguards at the pools, I'm not sure passengers would be at all happy with the changes that would need to be made to the pool decks to make it happen. As a former lifeguard and lifeguard instructor, IMO three major changes (in addition to the ones already mentioned) would have to happen:

1) The area immediately surrounding all pools would have to be kept clear of any obstructions (passengers, drinks, chairs, etc.) so that the guards had unobstructed access and movement around the pool.

2) each pool would have to have at least one elevated lifeguard tower/chair on each side of the pool to give the guard the ability to look down at the pool to see the bottom at all times, and

3) Pool capacity would have to be strictly enforced - guards need to be able to segment the pool into visual zones and be able to do continuous "head counts" in each zone.

(Hello McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit!)

You need to do the research on this one because the media got it all wrong back then and people continue to trot this out as an example of frivolous lawsuits. (hint: it was not)

Regarding the lifeguards, I think Maria (Islander500) makes some good points in her post.

Having been on Disney both before and after lifeguards, I can say that the change had very little impact on passenger behavior other than to enforce some basic rules like running on the pool deck. Parents that are going to be diligent are still diligent and parents who are going to let their kids swim on their own will still do so.

To argue that adding lifeguards is going to backfire is absurd. Do you really think that adding lifeguards is going to cause more accidents and drownings? I was on Oasis this past week and I went on a tour with one of the officers. He went on and on about how Royal Caribbean goes out of their way for safety. Adding life guards is only going to help this.