Celebrity dumps disabled man on island.

[KathyPet]

THe story I read indicated that this was in fact a charter for nude cruising. I also read that his wife was not with him (wonder why???). Lifting full grown people in and out of bed and on and off toilets is something that requires medical training so that neither the individual being lifted or the person doing the lifting is not injured. This is most certainly not something a butler on a cruise ship is trained to do or should be expected to do. He says he took a cruise in 2002 without any problem but he doesn't say whether his wife was with him then. Also he has degenerative muscular disease. 8 years have passed and one would assume that his condition has gone down hill since then and he probably requires more assistance now.

[graphicguy]

Well, reading all posts, I take this away from the OP's issue, and his legal representative's responses....

 

At best, going on this cruise was ill-conceived, especially without a trained medical companion, or his wife with him.

 

At worst, he and his counsel are trying to extort a free cruise and/or free publicity.

 

I realize it's not politically correct to question someone who has a disability.

 

That's the way I think most of us see it, though.

[montgomeryfamily]

Hi everyone,

 

Just posted an update on the story following interviews with Mr. Keskeny, his attorney, the line, ADA experts:

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=4449

 

There are still numerous unanswered questions -- like precisely what Celebrity means when they say the Sky Suite is ADA compliant -- but at this point, the line has said that it has no further comment. There are lawyers involved now, so I suppose they'll do their talking during 1) binding arbitration (the contractual dispute relating to the cruise cost, $4,000-plus, and the cost of transportation home, $1,500) and 2) if there is a separate ADA compliance lawsuit that results from the whole ordeal. Keskeny's attorney, Richard Bernstein, is adamant that there will be.

 

If anyone has any questions, I'll do my best to answer them. I'm by no means an expert in ADA legalese -- and how the ADA applies to foreign-flagged vessels generally, and to this incident specifically -- but I can certainly reach out to experts if need be. It's an understatement to say that the ADA 'standards,' 'guidelines' and the legal application and enforcement thereof (by the Department of Justice and the Department of Transportation) is ... complicated.

 

 

Dan, I would be interested to know whether Mr. Keskeny asked for a toilet seat riser once he was on the ship and felt that the toilet was too low for him. If he did, I would like to know what Celebrity's response was to the onboard request.

[PartyAllDaTyme]

What this guy is going to cause.........is that cruise lines will start requiring a doctor's statement........ that a disabled person is able to take care of themselves ......if they travel alone....;)

 

Thanks for your comment. In short, it's a question of scope.

 

In the piece, we tried to focus only on 1) Celebrity saying the cabin was compliant. 2) Mr. Keskeny saying it was not. 3) Asking if Keskeny could have been "reasonably accommodated" per 1990 ADA.

 

We then tried to examine, in brief, what makes a cabin ADA compliant (toilet height, bed height were the focus for Mr. Keskeny). This is a nuanced issue when it comes to cruise ships, and Celebrity did not illuminate us on *how* the Sky Suite was compliant. The line is offering no additional comment at this time.

 

You're right in a sense: Spector vs. Norwegian did indicate that foreign-flagged vessels departing from and returning to U.S. ports can be subject to ADA. Here's a link to the ruling.

 

Of the many nuanced ways ADA arguments may play out from Spector vs. NCL, one of the problems is the Access Board has only issued non-mandatory "Passenger Vessel Draft Guidelines" as a prescriptive measure. To my understanding, these are not standards but merely guidelines, and while ADA experts would argue that following said guidelines are in the best interest of the industry (and the passengers they wish to target), the extent to which cruise lines follow the guidelines may vary. NCL said they are fully ADA compliant, but did not explain *what* this means. Is NCL adhering to the non-enforceable draft guidelines (PVAG)? To the Standards for Accessible Design that are enforceable by the DOJ?

 

When you have no official structural standards pertaining to passenger vessels, yet you are required to provide "access" to disabled passengers, which standards are you legally obliged to adopt? I'm not a law expert -- this is just what various sources have explained.

 

So again, the big question for this particular piece is whether the cabin was ADA compliant, and more importantly, on what grounds was the cabin ADA compliant. Secondly, did the line attempt to reasonably accommodate Keskeny when problems arose.

 

There may be a follow-up in our future that more broadly examines the role of the cruise industry when it comes to ADA -- but that's absolutely a separate (and very lengthy) piece.

 

I'm glad real life interrupted my participation in this discussion long enough to read the above comments. I think they sum it up. Dan, IMO, you have shown yourself to be the most (and possibly the only) competent journalist working this story.

 

First, there's some question as to whether or not Mr. Keskeny ever signed the accessibility form. If not, he should not have been allowed to board in the first place, or should have been notified that his failure to do so meant that he was in effect "waiving his rights" to accessibility. This would have been Celebrity's fault. The solution will be a more stringent CYA attitude, including requiring disabled passengers to sign waivers or statements that they do not require any assistance of any kind from the cruise line, and no assistance of any kind will ever be offered.

 

Second, it all comes down to compliance, which could be the underlying motivation all along-- Mr. Keskeny, an activist, figures the best way to draw attention to what he perceives as a noncompliance problem is to make a test case out of it. This would explain why a "seasoned world traveler" would choose to sail in the absence of his wife, his choice of refusing to pay for a nurse, and his choice of return transportation through Haiti, this last assuming other return options were possible. These would all generate the most possible sympathy from an uninformed general audience. Or jury.

 

In this last, he may have succeeded in his efforts. It was still the wrong way to go about it. If ever I'm on a jury deciding the merits of an accessibility lawsuit, I'll now have this distasteful episode in the back of my mind. I would hope it would not influence my decision, but...

[montgomeryfamily]

Has anyone ascertained whether there is a lip going into that bathroom?

 

YES! See posts #45, #157, and #277 on this thread where I specifically discuss the presence of a lip or bump up at the entrance of the bathroom in this skysuite--in which we sailed on five day cruise. We also saw the other wheelchair accessible skysuite and it was the same.

 

I referred to this as a lip or bump up in my postings because to us it seemed more like a bump up but everyone was calling it a lip and I could see how it could be considered a lip--it seems a matter of sematics and I didn't want to add to the confusion.

[wanderlust402]

Mr. Askin, could you please explain how you can write an article about ADA issues on cruise ships without citing the ONE US Supreme Court case that specifically deals with that issue? Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd., 545 U.S. 119 (2005). The case clearly explains that foreign cruise ships based in US ports have to comply with the ADA.

 

Seems like the cruiser is expecting the ship to comply with what the ADA is as of 2010. This ship was last renovated in 2006 and I believe it met or exceeded the requirements at that time.

 

If you want to make sure that your vacation is on a ship that is up to the latest rules that you book a cruise on the newest ships. Celebrity Eclipse or Oasis/Allure of the Seas might have been a better choice.

 

Of course you know what else might have been a better choice?

 

Having cruise insurance and canceling when his caregiver was unable to make the trip.

 

Finding a replacement caregiver before taking the trip.

 

Accepting the reasonable offer to secure the services of an assistant.

 

Seems like the cruiser had a lot of choices. He chose to disembark and find his way home.

[GITC]

I had not been informed of the termination of common sense.

It's been said that common sense just isn't that common....;)

[bug_dan]

Also the cruiser with his experience regarding ADA matters, should have known immediately on checking out the cabin that it was not ADA compliant in his opinion. Why would he then stay in the cabin even one day as the non-compliance would have been a threat to his safety. Certainly on the day of embarkation he would have had ample opportunity to try to trade cabins with someone in another handicapped cabin that may have been ADA compliant. His other option was to just not take the cruise and risk any injury because of the non-compliant cabin:)

[RLM77]

Also he has degenerative muscular disease. 8 years have passed and one would assume that his condition has gone down hill since then and he probably requires more assistance now.

 

Would like to make a small correction, MS (multiple sclerosis), is a progressive disease of the central nervous system. It is NOT a muscular disease at all.

 

Many make that assumption, but in fact, the eventual difficulties with tremors, or walking or talking or swallowing or....are caused by an inappropriate immune reponse of the body atacking the nerves. This attack leaves scars (sclerosis), which impedes the sending of messages from the brain or spinal cord which "tell" your muscles to walk, your eyes to see, etc.

 

I was diagnosed with MS in 1981

 

Even Sam Bernstein, the attorney in this case has made this error. :rolleyes: On his website:

http://www.callsam.com/bernstein-media-center/richard-bernstein-news-fighting-for-justice/disabled-travelers-file-lawsuit-for-access-to-airlines/lawsuit-accuses-northwest-of-discriminating-against-disabled lists the MS patient who is the focus of this thread as:

James Keskeny, of Pinckney who has muscular dystrophy, alleges he was wheeled down the aisle of an airplane and titled parallel to the floor of the aircraft.

 

Sorry to belabor the point,

 

Marlee

[excitedofharpenden]

Would like to make a small correction, MS (multiple sclerosis), is a progressive disease of the central nervous system. It is NOT a muscular disease at all.

 

Many make that assumption, but in fact, the eventual difficulties with tremors, or walking or talking or swallowing or....are caused by an inappropriate immune reponse of the body atacking the nerves. This attack leaves scars (sclerosis), which impedes the sending of messages from the brain or spinal cord which "tell" your muscles to walk, your eyes to see, etc.

 

I was diagnosed with MS in 1981

 

Even Sam Bernstein, the attorney in this case has made this error. :rolleyes: On his website:

http://www.callsam.com/bernstein-media-center/richard-bernstein-news-fighting-for-justice/disabled-travelers-file-lawsuit-for-access-to-airlines/lawsuit-accuses-northwest-of-discriminating-against-disabled lists the MS patient who is the focus of this thread as:

 

 

Sorry to belabor the point,

 

Marlee

And of course there are many different forms of MS, from benign to chronic progressive and it can be a very bumpy or relatively smooth ride with all things in between depending upon how it affects you. I wish you well for the future Marlee. I was diagnosed with MS in 1988 when I was 24, but if you met me you'd never know. I feel I am one of the fortunate ones.

 

Just putting out a positive message about a disease that affects many in a lot of different ways.

 

Phil

[TravelerThom]

The name of the corporate parent [as given in their 2010 Annual Report; copy available at http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9ODkzMzR8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1] is

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd....

Thanks-- I did not have access to that and have never heard it referred to as such. I stand corrected.

Steve

 

Very few people do get this correct, but gaining new information is a plus in my book [and this info and $3.75 will get you a cup of coffee:rolleyes:].

 

Wikipedia states [i can't prove this is entirely correct, but I think it is]:

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. was formed in 1997 when Royal Caribbean Cruise Line, founded in 1968, and Celebrity Cruises, founded in 1988, was then purchased. The decision was made to keep the two cruise line brands separate following the merger; as a result Royal Caribbean Cruise Line was rebranded Royal Caribbean International and Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. was established as the new parent company of both Royal Caribbean International and Celebrity Cruises.

 

So the initials RCCL morphed from a cruise line to a holding company with a moderate change in what the letters stood for. Further confusion stems from www dot RCCL dot com delivering you to the RCI website. And even more confusion that the stock symbol is RCL.

 

Thom

[woodofpine]

So... When everyone here loses interest and the thread is buried deep in the archived pages of CC, preliminary rulings will be made... Has the plaintiff met the initial requirements of alleging facts that will sustain a suit under ADA against the myriad motions to dismiss presented by the line.

 

Then it will or will not proceed further - facts will be ascertained all the while (to some degree) and the line will again seek an ending of the case based on how ADA applies to facts present that are not subject to dispute.

 

If the plaintiff weathers that part of the case, there being a good chance he doesn't make it this far, then probably the case will be settled since there isn't much at stake here monetarily. If and only if the case gets that far, X would likely promise to do better in the future, and probably pay the plaintiff something very modest, and the plaintiff's attorney something more than modest... But he has to get that far which isn't too easy.

 

In the meantime, CC-ers will have found some other cause to be judge and jurors of... The line's profits will not hinge on this case or this website, and we'll all go about our business.

 

Sort of a fairy tale ending eh?

[J & G]

So here are a some questions.....

 

1) Was the cost of the "assistant/ nurse" greater than the cost of Mr. Keskeny's flight home ?

 

2) Would the cost of the nurse be considered a reasonable medical cost that would be covered by Medicare or private insurance?

 

3) Who would think that allowing or asking a fellow passenger (most likely a stranger) for help with personal hygiene, etc. was a good idea? (Maybe these people are related to those who take carry-on luggage so heavy that they clearly cannot heft it into the overhead bin on an airplane without help.....argh!)

 

4) Who will bear the cost if it is determined that people who cannot care for themselves, but who choose to travel alone, must be provided nursing-type care while traveling?

 

5) Why nude cruises, if one is not an avowed "naturist" (is that the PC term, here?) or is going to keep one's clothes on? (OK, maybe that's a rhetorical question.....)

[PartyAllDaTyme]

I just had another thought. I was thinking that Mr. Keskeny would make the claim that, had it not been for ADA noncompliance, he would not have had any problems. But in the latest Cruise Critic article, he states that he is "99 percent independent". So, he is admitting that he is not 100% self-sufficient. He mentions that he needs a little help "here and there", which he assumed he would be able to get from the butler. He assumed wrong. He was in violation of the cruise contract he signed, and Celebrity was free to do whatever they thought best. The ADA compliance issue is moot. End of story.

[montgomeryfamily]

I'm glad real life interrupted my participation in this discussion long enough to read the above comments. I think they sum it up. Dan, IMO, you have shown yourself to be the most (and possibly the only) competent journalist working this story.

 

First, there's some question as to whether or not Mr. Keskeny ever signed the accessibility form. If not, he should not have been allowed to board in the first place, or should have been notified that his failure to do so meant that he was in effect "waiving his rights" to accessibility. This would have been Celebrity's fault. The solution will be a more stringent CYA attitude, including requiring disabled passengers to sign waivers or statements that they do not require any assistance of any kind from the cruise line, and no assistance of any kind will ever be offered.

 

 

I do agree with Steve that Dan has been the best journalist working this story, especially trying to get the actual facts and being objective.

 

The special needs form is not an accessibility form. It is a form where 1.) guests can advise of special needs and 2.) sign, where applicable, that if the guest is booked in a wheelchair accessible stateroom, the guest has need of the features of that room. The latter is to attempt to "save" the wheelchair accessible rooms for the guests who actually have need for some or all of the features of the room. The former actually applies in many situations, including advising of food or other allergies, service animal situations, and requesting aids for deaf or hard of hearing passengers. This form does not cover the requirement that a passenger be self-sufficent or have sufficient assistance to meet activities of daily living--that is in the contract.

 

 

Steve, it is my understanding that your intent with your language that I have quoted above is that you are not advocating waivers or statements of no assistance but instead are showing the extemes that could come about as a response to the case involving this man. (Please correct me if I have misunderstood) I am responding to your language because I don't want anyone at Celebrity or Royal Caribbean or anyone else to have the idea that they can have disabled passengers to sign waivers of accessibility, like waivers of liability. If that were to be the case, we would feel compelled to file a complaint with the Department of Justice (DOJ) Disability Rights Section. We have never file a lawsuit or a complaint with DOJ as we have always either attempted to work directly with the facility/company for a solution/resolution/barrier removal or work around or we have felt the issue was minor enough to us and our situation that we just lived with it . That is why we tried working through the Celebrity staff hierarchy in regard to the balcony ramp issue I discussed in my posts and followed up with a letter to Celebrity (to which they have never responded,or at least as yet.)

 

But a waiver of rights of accessibility is, in the US, a waiver of a type of civil rights and contrary to the ADA and not something that we would be willing to accept. We would file a complaint with the DOJ because they do attempt to work out these types of issues via Consent Orders and other methods before resorting to litigation. (You can check out the http://www.ada.gov website and look at recent consent orders, including one signed by Norweigian Cruise lines)

 

Also, there are many types of assistance which is given on the cruise ship, from assistance with boarding/disembarkation, carrying trays in the buffet (which used to be standard with Celebrity but not so much anymore), tendering, sign language interpretation, etc. Many of these are used by people who have temporary injuries, non-mobility disabilities, elderly, parents with small children, etc, not just mobility impaired. So if the cruise line adopted the position that assistance of any type would never be offered to passengers, that would be a significant change in what a lot of people have come to expect, not just the disabled.

 

I hope that you are able to separate out how this man has approached matters than how you view other situations that may arise in the future. I understand how this can influence your perspective, but I can see you are quite reasonable and thoughtful. Let me offer that there are many types of people that act with a sense of entitlement or that act in a way in which others might disagree--some may be disabled, but we have also run into the situation with people who are Elite on Celebrity (and we are Elite too, but wouldn't dream of acting like some of the Elite we have met), people who are in suites, people who have booked in groups and taken over the ship, and many other types of people. But probably most people in those categories are not like that.

 

All of this being said, I still am not taking a position Mr. Keskeny's situation as I do not believe I have suffcient information, although Dan has helped to clarify the situation greatly. It does surprise me that Mr. Keskeny would think for asking for what appears to be routine help from fellow passengers to use the bathroom. I would like to know what it was that he requested them to do--for example, just to get into the bathroom or actually to get on and/or off the toilet or other tasks--Dan, can you inquire about the tasks he asked his fellow "passenger-helpers to perform? Could you also ask what help he wad expected, before boarding, to get from the butler?

[rebeccalouiseagain]

Celebrity ships have to be made ADA compliant if it economically feasible. It sounds like the bathroom floor is slightly higher than the bedroom floor. I believe this because other posters have said so. Does this violate ADA standards and was their a simple remedy for the situation. If so, then Celebrity should fix this issue- that would be reasonable.

 

As for the passenger, people in wheelchairs take on a certain risk by traveling alone. Did this person have a backup plan if they had trouble with the shower or toilet? Yes, this person thought the Butler would help with these things. He was wrong.

 

In the end it is not advisable for anyone with a disability to travel solo. Life isn't fair and people have to accept the limitations of their disability.

[PartyAllDaTyme]

I do agree with Steve that Dan has been the best journalist working this story, especially trying to get the actual facts and being objective.

 

Karen, in response to your post (I'm not going to quote the whole thing to save space), I wasn't trying to say his failure to fill out the special needs form, which I slangily referred to as the accessibility form, meant that it was necessary by law for him to complete, but that Celebrity requires those forms so they can ascertain what someone's needs are. I understand Celebrity cannot by law require someone to produce proof of disability, but my understanding was that if the form was not completed within 30 days of cruising that they would not hold the cabin. I was also not trying to say that failure to submit the form constituted a legal waiver of rights, but that, in effect, by not submitting the form, you were saying that you didn't really have the need for an accessible cabin, and therefore were getting it under the same terms as an AB person would when unsold cabins are released for booking by all. Also, you might have been looking at an earlier version of my post-- I realized after I had posted it that some of the things I had said about requiring handicapped passengers signing forms waiving their rights wouldn't fly. Sorry that I wasn't clear, my fault.

 

You are correct in your understanding of my intent.

[montgomeryfamily]

Yes, Steve, it was an earlier version. Apparently I was writing and posting the same time you were revising. No problem--I have to revise all the time too.

 

I do wish that Celebrity and Royal Caribbean (as well as other cruise lines) would check on the status of the submittal of the special needs forms for people booking wheelchair accessible staterooms and require them to actually submit the form before final confirmation of the reservation (confirm for the price/promo, but hold for a few days for the form before the final confirmation and taking the deposit) I do think that it would prevent some people/TAs from booking these cabins on pretense and make these cabins more available--of course, anyone can lie on the form, but it is extra work and I think people would be more reluctant to sign a form lying about their need for the accessible features of the cabin.

[Dale]

Yes, Steve, it was an earlier version. Apparently I was writing and posting the same time you were revising. No problem--I have to revise all the time too.

:D Sounds a little like, the revised revision has been revised again. :D

[wvufan]

Just a short note on one aspect related to pre cruise forms. (which is not the same as if the cabins are ADA accessible).

 

While it is true that in reference to asking for accommodations a person is not required under ADA to reveal their specific disability, they DO have to indicate what acccomodations they require. It is absurd to suggest that the cruise line or other facility or business should be able to automatically anticipate those needs. For example, a person who is deaf has to tell the cruiseline they need an interpreter ahead of time.

 

In the words of the great Jimmy Stewart, this guy's case is a bunch of horsepucky.

 

Happy Sails to You

 

OOOEEE :D:D Bob and Phyl

[alexkrn46]

So here are a some questions.....

 

1) Was the cost of the "assistant/ nurse" greater than the cost of Mr. Keskeny's flight home ?

 

A nurse gets paid ( LPN) around $20/hr, a nursing assistant what this man required about $15 hour, cheaper to fly home. Especially considering it was last minute and a naturalist cruise, would be hard to find.

 

2) Would the cost of the nurse be considered a reasonable medical cost that would be covered by Medicare or private insurance?

 

No, activities of daily living are not covered by insurance. Medcaid or some long term care policies may cover, but doubtful they would cover international water.

 

3) Who would think that allowing or asking a fellow passenger (most likely a stranger) for help with personal hygiene, etc. was a good idea? (Maybe these people are related to those who take carry-on luggage so heavy that they clearly cannot heft it into the overhead bin on an airplane without help.....argh!)

 

Not a good idea, and considering he feel when he had a fellow passenger assist him I would say dangerous.

4) Who will bear the cost if it is determined that people who cannot care for themselves, but who choose to travel alone, must be provided nursing-type care while traveling?

Every passenger will bear the cost.

 

5) Why nude cruises, if one is not an avowed "naturist" (is that the PC term, here?) or is going to keep one's clothes on? (OK, maybe that's a rhetorical question.....)

I find it odd, this was his second naturist cruise and yet to remove any of his clothes, a bit creepy for me.

[rebeccalouiseagain]

I guess he thought that nudists were used to being grossed out.

[PartyAllDaTyme]

I do wish that Celebrity and Royal Caribbean (as well as other cruise lines) would check on the status of the submittal of the special needs forms for people booking wheelchair accessible staterooms and require them to actually submit the form before final confirmation of the reservation (confirm for the price/promo, but hold for a few days for the form before the final confirmation and taking the deposit) I do think that it would prevent some people/TAs from booking these cabins on pretense and make these cabins more available--of course, anyone can lie on the form, but it is extra work and I think people would be more reluctant to sign a form lying about their need for the accessible features of the cabin.

 

Hopefully, with the advent in 2012 of separate categories for the accessible cabins, it will be more difficult for ABs to do so in the future.

[Kellie Poodle]

Just a short note on one aspect related to pre cruise forms. (which is not the same as if the cabins are ADA accessible).

 

While it is true that in reference to asking for accommodations a person is not required under ADA to reveal their specific disability, they DO have to indicate what acccomodations they require. It is absurd to suggest that the cruise line or other facility or business should be able to automatically anticipate those needs. For example, a person who is deaf has to tell the cruiseline they need an interpreter ahead of time.

 

In the words of the great Jimmy Stewart, this guy's case is a bunch of horsepucky.

 

Happy Sails to You

 

OOOEEE :D:D Bob and Phyl

 

I don't have a Celebrity Special Needs form, but I do have a Royal Caribbean one. I have to assume that they are similar if not the same. I'll do a little cut and paste here. I used bold and red type to make a point.

 

 

Guest��s Name: ______________________________________________

Please fill out the survey below and fax it to the Access Department at (954) 628-9622 at least 30 days prior to sailing (60 days

if you are requesting sign language interpreting services). This survey also applies to Cruisetours so we can better

accommodate your needs during your Cruisetour.

 

Disability (Optional)

 

Please indicate type of disability:

�� Difficulty Walking

�� Wheelchair/Scooter User

�� Low Vision

�� Blind

�� Hard of Hearing

�� Deaf

�� Other (please specify) _______________________________________________________

Mobility

Assistance

�� Wheelchair assistance at the pier

�� Cannot ascend/descend steps into a bus or motor coach

Note: Accessible transportation (with either a lift or ramp) will be provided if you are an Air/Sea or Cruisetour guest, or have

purchased cruise only transfers.

 

Equipment

 

�� Bringing a manual wheelchair

�� Bringing a power wheelchair

�� Bringing a scooter �� please specify brand _______________

Equipment details

�� Folding or collapsible

Dimensions W: ____ L:____ H: ____

Combined weight LBS: ______

Battery Type �� Gel �� Dry �� Wet

Stateroom Accommodations (on the ship)

 

�� Accessible stateroom with roll-in shower

�� Raised toilet seat

�� Shower stool

�� Commode chair

 

 

The form goes on to ask questions about other special needs.

[Kellie Poodle]

The cut and paste created the question marks. On the PDF form there are check boxes.