Jump to content

Sick Child-Familythrown off ship (merged)


Recommended Posts

Terrible things can happen very quickly with infants/small children when they're sick like that.

Who knows what really happened???

Don't forget that there are two sides to every story......and then there's the truth!

 

Very sorry they had to go through that :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I think the Doc didn't want to be "liable" for taking care of such a small child. Then I think if that's the case you shouldn' t let infants on board..... If you can't care for them if they have a simple cold then you shouldn't have them on as your guests....But you shouldn't have it both ways.. let infants sail and then throw them and their families off the ship

 

CuriousCat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Royal Caribbean told Eyewitness News late Friday they were concerned because the child is so young and they didn't want to take any chances. The company said they will give the family a credit to use on another Royal Caribbean trip, but they will not reimburse them for the passports and plane tickets because they didn't pay for trip insurance."

 

That is the key line there. I would never travel with a child with out some sort of insurance, whether trip or medical. Also, I wonder if they had passports in the first place. They probably just used birth certificates to board. I really find it hard to believe the RCI would let them leave without their passports. Maybe with out packing, but not with out proper form of identification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, and I mean if, this story is anywhere near representative of what happened, RCI has some serious explaining to do.

 

If the ship's Doc doesn't feel their medical facilities can handle a situation what choice do they have but send the child, 7 months old, to a local hospital.

 

What was the captain to do, hold up the ship's departure until the baby was or wasn't cleared for travel.

 

Finally, if you were bringing your child to a hospital in a foreign country wouldn't you grab your passports on the way out?

 

With the exception of the 10 minutes to depart, what explaining do you want to hear.

 

I guess it pays to get insurance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 7 month old will deteriorate extremely quickly if unwell with stomach upset, they can easily die without appropriate treatment. A ship is very limited as to what it can do for a baby that young if it gets dehydrated or goes into convulsions (which can happen when a baby is dehydrated through that sort of illness). The ship did the right thing. The fact is that the family should have had insurance and passports, had they had them, there would not have been any problem with repatriation.

 

I think you would find the complaint somewhat different had the child remained on board, not got any better and had died as a result of severe dehydration.

 

The ship's doctor most definately acted correctly. This is why cruise lines stipulate that children under 6 months old are not permitted to cruise. Losing that much fluid in a short time can and does kill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is this any different than the story about the family who had to leave their cruise because the ship's doc suspected the son might have appendicitis?

 

The family was not "kicked off the ship because their child was sick" They were told to take the child to the hospital for care that the ship's doctor couldn't provide.

 

It's not Royal Caribbean's fault that this family didn't have passports or travel insurance. Royal Caribbean is giving the family credit toward another cruise, which I think is good customer service, but not required.

 

Imagine what the story would have been if the ship's doctor had NOT told them to go to the hospital, and then the child became seriously ill out to sea? The family didn't have trip insurance, and they would have had to pay the cost of airlifting! And of course they would have blamed the ship's doctor for that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Start with an infant with vomiting/diarrhea, which don't sound like cold symptoms, a doctor who's not a pediatrician, an infirmary with limited resources, and a ship undoubtedly scheduled to leave port shortly. Add in a family who doesn't like anything they're hearing from RCI, and I could easily see them telling a story like that one, even if all that was happening from RCI's point of view was them trying to do what they thought was best for the infant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, there are two sides to every story. No one here knows just how sick this child looked. I'm sure a ship's medical facility is hardly staffed to take care of a severely sick child. Even many land based hospitals transfer them. If RCI had allowed them to continue the trip and then a sea evacuation had to be carried out the family would have gone to the press telling them about what an incompetent medical staff was aboard the ship and that they should have know that the infant was sick and might need evacuation if allowed to continue the cruise. And they would have ended up paying far more than $3000.00 in extra costs.

 

This is also a perfect example of why people should not be traveling without passports even if they can legally take the cruise without one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think of this story, the more I think the family should just be glad their baby is FINE, and stop complaining about Royal Caribbean.

 

IF the family had insurance, wouldn't it have paid for the family (or at least the baby and one parent) to rejoin the cruise at the next port?

 

IF the family was so sure the child just had a cold, why did they go to the ship's doctor in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, if the doctor onboard stated the child was dehydrated and needed a hospital then that doesn't leave much choice. On board medical centers are not hospitals. Once that diagnosis was made, there was no choice but to have them leave the ship.

 

The hospital then confirmed it was not dehydration but a cold and signed a declaration they could reboard. However the ship had already sailed.

 

The article stated "The company said they will give the family a credit to use on another Royal Caribbean trip, but they will not reimburse them for the passports and plane tickets because they didn't pay for trip insurance."

 

That is true and I would fully support Royal Caribbean on their position that if you fail to buy trip insurance - shame on you. Except for the fact the ship's doctor misdiagnosed the original condition which caused them to be forced to disembark which caused all the subsequent charges. I would hope that Royal Caribbean assumes some responsibility for the quality of medical help onboard since they determine the process for directly hiring or contracting out that medical help. If anyone is reading this from the corporate office, I suggest they do the right thing by this family. Legally they might not owe them anything. Ethically, the family was stranded due to a misdiagnosis by a ship's doctor that Royal Caribbean provides to supposedly help, not hurt financially, their customers. I urge Royal Caribbean to reconsider the their response.

 

By the way, I always buy trip insurance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone read this article yet

 

Family Says Cruise Ship Kicked Them Off Boat Because Child Was Sick

 

 

http://www.wftv.com/news/15998021/detail.html

 

 

 

 

I love RCCL but if this happened as the family told it... that's not good:mad:

 

CuriousCat

 

 

I have to disagree, if it happened as the story told it I think that´s the best decision the ships doctor and RCCL could have done.

 

It´s not RCCL´s fault the infant got sick and it´s not a good idea to have such an infant onboard. This kid needed treatment that would have been hard to be given in the ships infirmary. It´s not the cruiselines fault they had no passports and no insurance.

 

There´s just one part of the story that RCCL would be to be blamed for IF true. This is the ten minute for packing part. If they were really that hard pressured on time to get off it would be not such a good thing. But from the information given I say good for them to get the kid to the hospital and leave them onboard.

 

 

Just as a sidemark, this story should all those give a heads up that say I don´t need a passport for a cruise. Yep you don´t need it but please don´t cry about the cost when a situation like this comes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I think this story is highly OVERexagerated. Yes, usually I stick up for the families cruising with children. But I was IN this situation 3 years ago and it sounds similiar to our experience but in no way would I blame the cruiseline.

 

When my 8 month old caught a virus onboard Disney Magic and started seizing the ship's doctors and captain tried everything to get us evacuated to the Bahamas. It was a total rush. Our friends threw all of my stuff into bags and brought them to the ship's medical center. We were told that as soon as we could get off the ship, it would be a rush to do so.

 

In our case, the weather was too bad to evacuate us so the whole ship returned to Port Canaveral about 12 hours early. And AS SOON AS the ship docked, it was like a whirlwind. The medical team from Port Canaveral came running into the room, and literally raced us off to an ambulance. They just as quickly moved the rest of my family to a waiting shuttle.

 

This was not to protect the rest of the cruisers from my 8 month old but it was to save my 8 month old baby. In cases where the babies are very young, I have seen first hand where the doctors get VERY concerned and do everything in their power to help the child reach a hospital with pediatric services.

 

I guess from the outside, it would look like they were being callous trying to hussle them off the ship. But I can tell you, they move FAST. They want the child to receive the best possible care as soon as possible. And if that means "dumping you off" in another country, then that's what they'll do.

 

This family traveled without INSURANCE and without passports. :rolleyes: The only one they have to blame is themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's turn this around and suppose it wasn't a child but an adult who had symptoms of a heart attack. The ship would not be equipped for this and the passenger and famiy would have to deal with the same situation. This is only "newsworthy" because it's a baby. I can't stand people who parade stories like this around just because it's a baby. Is the world supposed to stop because YOUR child is sick?! I would be upset if I was on the cruise and it waited around. They gave them 10 minutes because their was 2,000+ more passengers on their vacation. and their kid is sick! They needed to go to a hospital

 

Why would someone bring such a young baby on a cruise? I'm only 27 with no kids and have enough sense to know their immune systems are weak and get sick at the drop of a hat. Go someplace that can accomodate them a little better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except for the fact the ship's doctor misdiagnosed the original condition which caused them to be forced to disembark which caused all the subsequent charges. I would hope that Royal Caribbean assumes some responsibility for the quality of medical help onboard since they determine the process for directly hiring or contracting out that medical help. If anyone is reading this from the corporate office, I suggest they do the right thing by this family. Legally they might not owe them anything. Ethically, the family was stranded due to a misdiagnosis by a ship's doctor that Royal Caribbean provides to supposedly help, not hurt financially, their customers. I urge Royal Caribbean to reconsider the their response.

 

By the way, I always buy trip insurance.

 

Sounds to me like the ship's doctor was being quite conscientious. I hope someone from the corporate office is reading this and stands their ground and supports the medical team. And, yes, they should assume responsibility for the quality of the medical help on board. It sounds to me like it was quite excellent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with the story is the 10 minutes to pack. No way 2 adults get everything packed. I would much rather have a doctor tell me he can't handle a situation then him saying he can when in fact he can't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post, now be prepared to be eaten alive by the RCCL fanatics trying to justtify that.

 

I am not an RCCL fanatic trying to justify anything. I can guarantee that the missing piece is that a medical team WITH ambulance was waiting to rush the child to the hospital.

 

So if you were at home and had a medical emergency, would you call 911, then say, "Oh give me an hour to pack my bag for the hospital?" :rolleyes:

 

You call 911, and get your butt to the hospital as fast as possible.

 

Read my post, the cruislines don't just throw families off the ship.

 

Also, I forgot to add in my original post. When the cruisline got us off the ship, we were handed a paper with all contacts...one for a cruisline rep, one for a shuttle service that they paid for, one for a hotel and a few others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't blame RCCL for requiring the child to leave the ship for further medical attention. Little people lose body fluids super fast and can become critical within a few hours. As a parent I would have run off of the ship to seek further medical attention if I had a child that young who had any chance of dehydrating. No vacation is more important than the potential health impact to one of my kids. Then I would have kicked myself for not bothering to get trip insurance and passports. Those are basics for any traveler, especially when they have kids to protect.

 

It's great that RCCL has given these people a cruise credit. Their health insurance company should reimburse the hospital bill. Passports and plane tickets should be their responsiblity since they resulted from being unprepared travelers. Now and then people have to take some personal responsibility and quit expecting corporate America and the government to babysit them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very pleased with this thread and the calmness and foresight of the posters.

 

While it is a tragedy that the family had to leave the ship I do agree that it was necessary. As I always contended as well, a ship has not the facilities to pinpoint diseases and illnesses. When it comes to older patients and the real young ones it is better for the doctor to refer them to a local hospital.

 

When you travel with older people and babies you always should have travel insurance.

 

I also question the 10-minute "had to leave now" episode. It was more likely that the family was made aware of a departure time but refused to obeye and then it became a rush.

 

The family was ill prepared and put Royal Caribbean in an awkward situation. That Royal Caribbean offers them a new cruise is more than they are required to do.

 

I also agree with the other poster about the passports. If they have had passports it would have been a crime to leave without them. I also think that they were just traveling with a photo ID and a BC. It does pay to just have passports from the get go. Don't know why people just don't want to get them. Thinks can happen, got to be prepared.

 

On another note: to the TV station

IT IS NOT A BOAT. IT IS A SHIP!!!!!!

 

And they were most likely not kicked off.

 

It is really sad when news reporting become a slanted affair and their desire to make a name of themselves in 'consumer protection reporting' is getting in the way of fair and balanced journalism.

 

So they spend $3000. $650 for tickets, $450 for passports and another $600 for the emergency room. So essentially they traveled with 5 people for $1300.

 

BTW, it was most likely a 4-Nighter. The Majesty is not running 5-Nighters yet.

 

One more thing: I think it supports my theory of the advanced warning to leave the ship (not the boat). Since they were most likely on a 4-Nighter the Majesty is to leave around 6pm but obviously was still in port by 11pm. I'd reckon it was to give the family time to leave - Or the family or news station just simply lied to give the story another twist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...