Princess now requires Passport for Minors with only One Adult

[cherylandtk]

I stumbled across this information in a different thread and I don't know when this changed, but for any single parent taking their kid on a Caribbean cruise, it could be huge. Especially if you are heading out for Spring Break. I know most pax already have passports, but if you were planning on traveling with just Birth Certificates and IDs, think again:

 

PASSPORT REQUIREMENT WHEN MINORS TRAVEL WITH ONE ADULT ON VOYAGES GOVERNED BY THE U.S. WESTERN HEMISPHERE TRAVEL INITIATIVE (includes travel within BERMUDA, CANADA, CARIBBEAN, HAWAII, MEXICO, PANAMA CANAL, UNITED STATES) When minors are traveling with only one adult 21 years of age or older, Princess requires that all passengers must be in possession of a valid passport. We have implemented this requirement because we want to ensure that your party remains together should an emergency arise that requires one or more in your party to be disembarked in a non-U.S. port. We cannot guarantee that all members of your party will be allowed to disembark with just a WHTI-compliant document or birth certificate. Failure to present a valid passport for all passengers traveling together will result in denial of boarding without refund of the of the cruise or cruisetour fare.

.

 

From http://www.princess.com/learn/faq_answer/pre_cruise/prepare.jsp

[PescadoAmarillo]

That IS huge, but I bet it will catch some people off-guard. It makes perfect sense, though, and I'm glad Princess is doing that. Thanks for posting this!!

[WeBeGone]

I'm sure other lines will soon follow.

[Putterdude]

I can certainly see the logic in the policy.....but it is likely to seriously impact people who book at the last minute.

[dwjoe]

Just to point out that this is a special requirement that Princess imposes. Credit to njhorseman for the find, and for pointing out that you should always re-check your cruise line's published requirements which may be stricter than what the government requires.

[A&Jfamily]

It makes sense to me. I am also an advocate of everyone having a passport...my 9 and 14 yo have had them since 2 and 8, on every cruise. And they have come in handy. Once in Mexico, Carnival's machine's were down and they were needed to board. And, on this last trip, my youngest lost his card on shore, so the passport allowed the ships personal to match his registered photo and board.

 

IMHO this is just the safer way to go.

[CantanaLobo]

I'm trying to figure out the scenario they're trying to cover with "We cannot guarantee that all members of your party will be allowed to disembark". Did something like this actually happen, or is this just theoretical? I'm not addressing whether the requirement is good, bad, or indifferent, just wondering what sparked it. Was a single parent not allowed to disembark (i.e. enter another country) with an injured child because all the parent had was a BC & DL?

 

I do predict some single parents being denied boarding. I'm glad someone noted the requirement, it might save someones vacation with their children.

 

I also predict the flames of the Great Passport Debate will be fanned anew :).

[Pam in CA]

I'm trying to figure out the scenario they're trying to cover with "We cannot guarantee that all members of your party will be allowed to disembark". Did something like this actually happen, or is this just theoretical? I'm not addressing whether the requirement is good, bad, or indifferent, just wondering what sparked it. Was a single parent not allowed to disembark (i.e. enter another country) with an injured child because all the parent had was a BC & DL?

I have no idea what caused this change but I suspect that the passport issues on the Carnival Triumph last month might have had some influence. Over 900 passengers didn't have passports. The safety and security of a child should have priority.

[leavingocalaagain]

This appears to me to be a very good policy.

[dwjoe]

I'm having a hard time coming up with a specific scenario that Princess is trying to avoid. Best guess: maybe there was a case where a single parent family was travelling without passports, and the parent was forced to disembark due to medical reasons, and Princess did not want to have to put the kids ashore without a passport knowing they would find it difficult to get home, but also did not want to be responsible for the children alone on board. Whereas with a two parent family the risk is less.

[Loonbeam]

I can see an couple of reasons to do this.

 

The most obvious one is that if the child has a passport and the parent doesn't and the child is injured or needs medical attention at a foreign port. While the child can be disembarked easily, the parent or guardian may need a lot more effort to do so, potentially leaving Princess in charge of a minor until it can be resolved.

 

The interesting thing is why only if one adult? If there are two adults and both don't have passports you are in the same position. It should be for each person under 21, at LEAST one adult in the travelling party and the child should have a passport.

[critterchick]

I can see an couple of reasons to do this.

 

The most obvious one is that if the child has a passport and the parent doesn't and the child is injured or needs medical attention at a foreign port. While the child can be disembarked easily, the parent or guardian may need a lot more effort to do so, potentially leaving Princess in charge of a minor until it can be resolved.

 

The interesting thing is why only if one adult? If there are two adults and both don't have passports you are in the same position. It should be for each person under 21, at LEAST one adult in the travelling party and the child should have a passport.

 

I was puzzling over that as well. I should think that the parent would be more likely to have a passport and the child wouldn't, so Princess is more concerned that the child would have to stay onboard without a parent. So are they playing the odds game that the parents would split up if one were disembarked for a medical emergency and the other would stay onboard with the child? I don't imagine many people would abandon their ill spouse in a foreign country...

 

The line that Princess have drawn makes no sense to me. Either they should require everybody travelling with another person, adult or minor (who would leave their 18 year old on board alone?), to have a passport or stick to the current U.S. requirement for closed-loop cruises. Just my opinion....

 

And if, as Pam so reasonably speculated, it had anything to do with the Triumph fiasco, I wonder if Carnival (and all of their lines) have or will soon implement the same policy...

[dwjoe]

I am going to speculate that this is not related to the Triumph incident, because of the similar Splendor incident in 2010. Like the Triumph, the Splendor was under consideration to be towed to Mexico so the thought of pax without passports in a ship-adrift situation is probably not new to Princess' parent company, Carnival. Further, why would Princess focus on single-parent families if that were the case? It would be an issue for all pax.

[CruisinChris]

Well, this is a horrible thought, but if the guardian/solo parent were to pass away, the child's status would be in limbo since they were in essence traveling on their parent's passport.

[Rinderoo]

Fanning the Passport debate...

 

CAN they really do this though? Can a business make their requirements more strict than the Federal law? A business can do anything they want until they are challenged, but will a challenge hold up? The cruise line can deny boarding and say they will not issue a refund, but is that legal if their requirement is more strict than the current law? Any legal types want to weigh in on this?

 

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis_pa_tw_2223.html

 

The policy makes total sense to me and my kids have always had passports. You just never know what's going to happen and they are a good investment.

[Teris50]

I am also a strong advocate for passports. I suggest all my clients get them even with a closed loop cruise! I totally believe, and this is just MY OPINION, but I totally believe that was why the Triumph did not go to Mexico when they had the fire in the engine room recenlty. APPROX one third of the passengers DID NOT HAVE PASSPORTS, which would have created a different nightmare for those trying to get home from Mexico without those passports! Never leave the US without a passport!

Better to be safe then sorry!

[dwjoe]

Fanning the Passport debate...

 

CAN they really do this though? Can a business make their requirements more strict than the Federal law? A business can do anything they want until they are challenged, but will a challenge hold up? The cruise line can deny boarding and say they will not issue a refund, but is that legal if their requirement is more strict than the current law? Any legal types want to weigh in on this?

 

The policy makes total sense to me and my kids have always had passports.

I'm not a lawyer, but I will cite the example of Regent, Seaborne, and Crystal, who have required passports of all guests for some time. So presumably a business is free to insist on one as a condition of carriage.

 

If Princess' new policy makes sense to you, perhaps you can explain it me because I am not certain what their reasoning is.

[dwjoe]

Well' date=' this is a horrible thought, but if the guardian/solo parent were to pass away, the child's status would be in limbo since they were in essence traveling on their parent's passport.[/quote']

I think you misunderstand. There is no such thing as travelling on a parent's passport, at least in the U.S.

[Rinderoo]

I'm not a lawyer, but I will cite the example of Regent, Seaborne, and Crystal, who have required passports of all guests for some time. So presumably a business is free to insist on one as a condition of carriage.

 

If Princess' new policy makes sense to you, perhaps you can explain it me because I am not certain what their reasoning is.

 

Why it makes sense to me is if there's a passport then they can disembark a minor with the adult at a port and not have responsibility for getting the minor back to the USA. Send the kid off with the adult and then its the problem of the country where the kid was disembarked.

 

Consider the solo adult with kids who leaves a kid on board and gets in trouble in port and does not board: Simply pack up the kid and drop him/her with a government rep. Have a problem on the ship? Simple: Kick everyone off and no guilt, because the kid can fly home while the adult is detained. A kid without a passport can't be dropped off in that country, right?

 

Two adults traveling on the cruise means that one can stay with the child that has no passport, or assume responsibility for the minor in the foreign country.

 

I have advised passports for my clients for years. They eliminate a whole lot of potential problems. Seems like everyone in the rest of the world who travels has passports. Its just people in the USA who don't seem to embrace them.

[dwjoe]

Why it makes sense to me is if there's a passport then they can disembark a minor with the adult at a port and not have responsibility for getting the minor back to the USA. Send the kid off with the adult and then its the problem of the country where the kid was disembarked.

 

Consider the solo adult with kids who leaves a kid on board and gets in trouble in port and does not board: Simply pack up the kid and drop him/her with a government rep. Have a problem on the ship? Simple: Kick everyone off and no guilt, because the kid can fly home while the adult is detained. A kid without a passport can't be dropped off in that country, right?

 

Two adults traveling on the cruise means that one can stay with the child that has no passport, or assume responsibility for the minor in the foreign country.

Ok, that makes a certain amount of sense. I have a feeling Princess encountered a scenario like this and wants to avoid it in future.

[Rinderoo]

This is funny, because it actually applies to me and my cruise at the end of the month. We have two cabins: DD (a minor) and I are in one room, and hubby with 18 y/o DS are in the other.

 

Online check in is complete with passport, which is probably why I did not get an email from Princess.

 

Wondering if they are emailing people traveling with one adult and minors about their policy?

[Loonbeam]

Sure they can. They can deny you boarding for wearing the wrong color shoes, as long as such condition is given as a prerequisite to board prior.

 

When you buy the ticket you agree to the contract. You have no recourse other than proving a breach on their side.

 

 

Fanning the Passport debate...

 

CAN they really do this though? Can a business make their requirements more strict than the Federal law? A business can do anything they want until they are challenged, but will a challenge hold up? The cruise line can deny boarding and say they will not issue a refund, but is that legal if their requirement is more strict than the current law? Any legal types want to weigh in on this?

 

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis_pa_tw_2223.html

 

The policy makes total sense to me and my kids have always had passports. You just never know what's going to happen and they are a good investment.

[Pmorton3360]

We just went through this. We were told by letter, that everyone in our group needed a passport. When we called, they said not necessary. We went around with this for a couple days. Princess said by phone to us and TA not needed. When the two without passports went to fill out forms, they were told they could not board without passports. This is a mother and 17 year old and a German exchange student. They got the passports and all is well. The part that bothered us was the difference on the phone. We had checked before the cruise was booked. We were lucky they got them so quickly. And I agree, I would not travel without one. They had already gotten enhanced drivers license and then the expense of the passport. I just wish they would have stated the policy and made their employees aware.

[dwjoe]

We just went through this. We were told by letter, that everyone in our group needed a passport. When we called, they said not necessary. We went around with this for a couple days. Princess said by phone to us and TA not needed. When the two without passports went to fill out forms, they were told they could not board without passports. This is a mother and 17 year old and a German exchange student. They got the passports and all is well. The part that bothered us was the difference on the phone. We had checked before the cruise was booked. We were lucky they got them so quickly. And I agree, I would not travel without one. They had already gotten enhanced drivers license and then the expense of the passport. I just wish they would have stated the policy and made their employees aware.

 

Glad you were able to get this straightened out before boarding.

 

This another example of how you cannot rely on phone reps (from any cruise line), and especially not if they contradict something in writing from the cruise line.

[dwjoe]

I am rethinking my position on this. Princess may be allowed to impose a universal passport requirement, but I don't know if they can single out cruisers in a particular demographic. It's going to be messy for Princess if a single mom shows up at the cruise terminal with passport cards for her family after being told they're OK on the phone, is denied boarding due to lack of a passport, and then alleges discrimination.

 

Further, enforcing this rule is going to get messy. Who exactly is considered "your party" for purposes of this rule? Consider extended families booked in multiple staterooms. "No the kids aren't travelling with just 1 adult... Dad is in the next room, just a different booking". And what if it isn't Dad, but Aunt Sally? Does that require a passport? And what if Mom can't make the cruise at the last minute, can Bill the brother-in-law act as the 2nd adult for purposes of this rule? Does that require a passport? And can you trust the answer you get?