Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
Pauser

Family's statement on toddler's cruise death

Recommended Posts

 

Another statement that was made was the grandfather lifted her up because she wanted to bang on the window. Since the windows go from floor to ceiling she could have just banged on the window while standing on the floor. That just seems to make the argument that he knew the higher part of the window was open and put her up there so she could see out better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly why I don’t trust grandparents with young kids in these types of situations. Am I going to let any of them hold my kid’s hand on the sidewalk of a busy street? If one of them gets away to chase something in the street there’s no way they’d be able to catch them. I could absolutely see one of my kids grandparents making the same kind of mistake this grandfather did. 

 

That being said, that’s not a condemnation of all grandparents, but I know their limitations and either try not to put them situations they can’t handle, or watch my kids like a hawk when they’re with them. Obviously this grandfather was unable to tell the window was open for whatever reason (not paying attention, deteriorating eyesight/other senses, etc), and the family was not expecting him to make a mistake like this. This is not the first time a child has died under supervision of a grandparent on a cruise ship. A 4 year old boy died and his 6 year old brother suffered permanent brain injury (I think) on the Breakaway because they were swimming under the supervision of a grandparent who left them unattended for a few minutes (allegedly). I don’t know if it’s the deteriorating senses/reactions/decision making that’s to blame, but I’ve noticed that grandparents often think kids are way more capable of certain things than is age-appropriate.

 

This really is a tragedy, and my heart aches for everyone involved. Anyone could have made this kind of mistake, and I think Royal needs to take the hit on this. Am I going lift my kid up near a railing over the ocean? Of course not. Would I do it near what I thought was a wall of windows? Sure why not. They either need to put some mesh or bars over a tiny random opening in a wall of windows, or make the opening head level or higher.

 

Finally I’m not saying grandparents shouldn’t be trusted with your kids, obviously they’re a valued and important resource for anyone who has kids. It’s more like a mini-treatise on grandparent risk management in potentially dangerous situations (ie any situation that is not reasonably near 100% safe). 

 

TL;DR

I’m a paranoid parent who doesn’t trust kids with grandparents in most situations, and definitely not on cruise ships. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I’ve read that Grandpa is only 50, so it’s not like he’s an elderly dottering man one step away from the nursing home. I’ve seen several photos of him with the little girl; it looks like they spent a lot of time together. I’m sure it never occurred to the parents that he would make such a bad judgment call.

 

 I’ve wondered what the police officer father thinks about it. I think it would be much harder to forgive an in-law than a parent or step parent.

Edited by kren250

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a video that was posted by online media of the grandfather as he was traveling.  He does not appear to be so elderly that he can't see.  It's very sad to watch though.  How does a person go on knowing their mistake caused the loss of a child?  That would be life sentence.  It was originally reported that the grandfather said that he was holding the little girl and lost his grip.  I think that statement is the truth.  He probably thought she would like to look out of the open window.

It's unfortunate that the attorney is making it into something that it is not and insisting on holding the cruise ship accountable. I think the attorney is taking advantage of a grieving family for his own personal gain.  Some people who have not seen these windows are made to believe that a person might not know if they are open or closed or that they are dangerous.  It's simply not true.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tomservo said:

This is exactly why I don’t trust grandparents with young kids in these types of situations. Am I going to let any of them hold my kid’s hand on the sidewalk of a busy street? If one of them gets away to chase something in the street there’s no way they’d be able to catch them. I could absolutely see one of my kids grandparents making the same kind of mistake this grandfather did. 

 

That being said, that’s not a condemnation of all grandparents, but I know their limitations and either try not to put them situations they can’t handle, or watch my kids like a hawk when they’re with them. Obviously this grandfather was unable to tell the window was open for whatever reason (not paying attention, deteriorating eyesight/other senses, etc), and the family was not expecting him to make a mistake like this. This is not the first time a child has died under supervision of a grandparent on a cruise ship. A 4 year old boy died and his 6 year old brother suffered permanent brain injury (I think) on the Breakaway because they were swimming under the supervision of a grandparent who left them unattended for a few minutes (allegedly). I don’t know if it’s the deteriorating senses/reactions/decision making that’s to blame, but I’ve noticed that grandparents often think kids are way more capable of certain things than is age-appropriate.

 

This really is a tragedy, and my heart aches for everyone involved. Anyone could have made this kind of mistake, and I think Royal needs to take the hit on this. Am I going lift my kid up near a railing over the ocean? Of course not. Would I do it near what I thought was a wall of windows? Sure why not. They either need to put some mesh or bars over a tiny random opening in a wall of windows, or make the opening head level or higher.

 

Finally I’m not saying grandparents shouldn’t be trusted with your kids, obviously they’re a valued and important resource for anyone who has kids. It’s more like a mini-treatise on grandparent risk management in potentially dangerous situations (ie any situation that is not reasonably near 100% safe). 

 

TL;DR

I’m a paranoid parent who doesn’t trust kids with grandparents in most situations, and definitely not on cruise ships. 

As a 63 year old grandmother to 7 1/2 twins who I have watched since they were 3 weeks old, I beg to differ. My parents watched my two kids from birth while I worked and I completely and wholeheartedly trusted them as my son trusts us. We take them on vacations alone since they were 2 years old and still remember to bring them back, alive and unhurt. Truth be known, I am more aware of the dangers that can happen then these new 30 something parents think. If you don’t think this is a condemnation of us loving and watchful grandparents, then you’re mistaken. Apparently you must be very monetarily comfortable to not have to rely on grandparents to help. We live in NYC and  a two income household leaves little left for unrelated daycare personnel to watch our beloved grandkids. JMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TNcruising02 said:

It's unfortunate that the attorney is making it into something that it is not and insisting on holding the cruise ship accountable. I think the attorney is taking advantage of a grieving family for his own personal gain.

 

From what is said before, this seems to be to the logical first line of defense. You can't blame an attorney for doing what he thinks is in the best interest of the family. No matter how unreasonable the CC community thinks it is to blame the cruise line, if it could be of any help it's his job to do so. Now I'm not a lawyer,  but I think if he would not try everything possible, like blaming the cruise line, he could find himself in trouble for not doing his job.

 

Besides, every attorney makes money by helping people who are in trouble. Just like a doctor is "taking advantage" of people being ill. They have bills to pay, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

From what is said before, this seems to be to the logical first line of defense. You can't blame an attorney for doing what he thinks is in the best interest of the family. No matter how unreasonable the CC community thinks it is to blame the cruise line, if it could be of any help it's his job to do so. Now I'm not a lawyer,  but I think if he would not try everything possible, like blaming the cruise line, he could find himself in trouble for not doing his job.

 

Besides, every attorney makes money by helping people who are in trouble. Just like a doctor is "taking advantage" of people being ill. They have bills to pay, too. 


When the attorney states things that aren't true and encourages that narrative with a grieving family, I think it's very dishonest.  The windows aren't in a children's play area.  They aren't dangerous and you can tell when they are open or closed.  As far as the story about what happened, it's not what the police said the grandfather said in the first place. I don't know how some of these attorneys can sleep at night knowing they make money by trying to deflect blame.

There are cases where a company is definitely at fault and an attorney is needed.  However, this obviously isn't one of those cases.

The attorney:

"He said in a statement reported by Sky News: "The grandfather didn't drop the child, the child fell due to an open glass pane that should have been closed securely.

Mr Winkleman said the grieving family wants to know why a window that "should have been closed securely" was open."

Edited by TNcruising02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, lovemycruisetoo said:

As a 63 year old grandmother to 7 1/2 twins who I have watched since they were 3 weeks old, I beg to differ. My parents watched my two kids from birth while I worked and I completely and wholeheartedly trusted them as my son trusts us. We take them on vacations alone since they were 2 years old and still remember to bring them back, alive and unhurt. Truth be known, I am more aware of the dangers that can happen then these new 30 something parents think. If you don’t think this is a condemnation of us loving and watchful grandparents, then you’re mistaken. Apparently you must be very monetarily comfortable to not have to rely on grandparents to help. We live in NYC and  a two income household leaves little left for unrelated daycare personnel to watch our beloved grandkids. JMHO

 

I didn't mean this to be a blanket condemnation, as I stated. Your grandkids are very lucky to have you, it seems like you are a very attentive and careful grandparent. Not all grandparents are like you. It also doesn't change the fact that many of the children who have died or have been injured on cruise ships were under the care of an elderly grandparent. I would say 63 is definitely on the younger side for grandparents, at least in the Northeast where people have children at an older age than the rest of the country.

 

Also I'm not sure why you assume financial comfort for lack of grandparent help. Our parents simply live nowhere near us. Trust me, I am envious of our friends who have parents in the area, it has been very difficult raising 2 extremely rambunctious boys on our own. To reiterate, this is all about risk management. The older we get, the more likely we are to experience brief momentary lapses in judgement or attention. For example, parking lot accident rates go up as people get older. This is another example of an extremely brief lapse in judgement/attention that can be fatal. My mother-in-law wrecked her car in a parking lot (fortunately neither she nor anyone was hurt) somehow, she's not sure what happened, either the car wasn't in the right gear or her foot slipped onto the gas pedal. She's in her early 70's, and I would consider her to be alert and attentive, but like I said these things become more frequent the older you get.

Edited by tomservo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, TNcruising02 said:


When the attorney states things that aren't true and encourages that narrative with a grieving family, I think it's very dishonest.  The windows aren't in a children's play area.  They aren't dangerous and you can tell when they are open or closed.  As far as the story about what happened, it's not what the police said the grandfather said in the first place. I don't know how some of these attorneys can sleep at night knowing they make money by trying to deflect blame.

There are cases where a company is definitely at fault and an attorney is needed.  However, this obviously isn't one of those cases.

The attorney:

"He said in a statement reported by Sky News: "The grandfather didn't drop the child, the child fell due to an open glass pane that should have been closed securely.

Mr Winkleman said the grieving family wants to know why a window that "should have been closed securely" was open."

 

"He said in a statement reported by Sky News: "The grandfather didn't drop the child, the child fell due to an open glass pane that should have been closed securely.

Mr Winkleman said the grieving family wants to know why a window that "should have been closed securely" was open."

 

Sorry how would the be any different if a grandparent was walking his kid to school and he ran across the street and got run over, who is liable/fault, sorry a bit extreme, but a bit of common sense is required here.

 

A tragedy indeed, gross negligence by the cruise company or anyone there, likely not.  Curious attorney hired by family  or came calling it doing it for... 

Edited by chipmaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, TNcruising02 said:

When the attorney states things that aren't true and encourages that narrative with a grieving family, I think it's very dishonest.  The windows aren't in a children's play area.  They aren't dangerous and you can tell when they are open or closed.  As far as the story about what happened, it's not what the police said the grandfather said in the first place. I don't know how some of these attorneys can sleep at night knowing they make money by trying to deflect blame.

 

I completely agree where you say that it's obviously not the line's fault. Except that the attorney shouldn't sleep well if he didn't his utmost to help his client, no matter what is real or what he thinks is reasonable.  That's his job. The other side will explain that it was very clear that the window was open, that the "banging windows" explanation doesn't mean you should pick up the child, that such stupidity never happened before, and then it's up to the judge. There are three parties involved, of which the attorney must do whatever he can, just like the prosecution should. 

 

Personally, I think it has no use whatsoever to put Grandpa in jail. 

Edited by AmazedByCruising
sp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a study done (can't remember where but it was in a medical journal) that they compared injury

rates with parents, babysitters and grandparents. Injuries that happened when the grandparents had

the kids were much lower. That said I know both my parents and my in-laws at times have not used

good judgement so I used to watch them like a hawk and almost never let them watch them when they

were little. It all comes down to the individual person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

I completely agree where you say that it's obviously not the line's fault. Except that the attorney shouldn't sleep well if he didn't his utmost to help his client, no matter what is real or what he thinks is reasonable.  That's his job. The other side will explain that it was very clear that the window was open, that the "banging windows" explanation doesn't mean you should pick up the child, that such stupidity never happened before, and then it's up to the judge. There are three parties involved, of which the attorney must do whatever he can, just like the prosecution should. 

 

Personally, I think it has no use whatsoever to put Grandpa in jail. 

The lawyer was asked in a video interview with the media (which you can watch on youtube) if he was a defense attorney and he said he was not. He works for a maritime law firm that strictly takes on cases to sue cruise lines. He's not working to help keep the grandfather out of jail so much as he is trying to make a case again RC for either a lawsuit or settlement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could have happened to anyone -- grandparent, or parent.


It was poor judgement with a tragic consequence.

 

As for the lawyer -- it's their job to blur the lines in hope to win, or settle (most likely settle)...so can't blame them for doing their job (someone has to). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Peachypooh said:

There was a study done (can't remember where but it was in a medical journal) that they compared injury

rates with parents, babysitters and grandparents. Injuries that happened when the grandparents had

the kids were much lower. That said I know both my parents and my in-laws at times have not used

good judgement so I used to watch them like a hawk and almost never let them watch them when they

were little. It all comes down to the individual person. 

Just an observation of life:  I think "younger grandparents" are more diligent than young parents.  The parents haven't has as much life experience.

With that being said, I doubt the 18 month old "expressed" a desire to bang on the glass like at a hockey game.  Grandpa probably lifted her up to an open pane because she could get a better view and she decided to "lunge forward" like at a hockey game....just like a kid running after a ball in the street.  This child wasn't aware of "falling" as the toddler running into the street isn't aware of cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was an avoidable tragedy and the grief and guilt must be unbearable. I think that it would be a nice gesture for RCCL to cover funeral costs, and grief counseling for the family and for any that witnessed it as a goodwill gesture without admitting guilt. It kind of sickens my stomach that a family would actually try to benefit financially from a death of a child unless there was clear negligence of another and again, in this case it just seems like her death was from a lapse of judgement from someone who loved her very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, April42749 said:

Just an observation of life:  I think "younger grandparents" are more diligent than young parents.  The parents haven't has as much life experience.

With that being said, I doubt the 18 month old "expressed" a desire to bang on the glass like at a hockey game.  Grandpa probably lifted her up to an open pane because she could get a better view and she decided to "lunge forward" like at a hockey game....just like a kid running after a ball in the street.  This child wasn't aware of "falling" as the toddler running into the street isn't aware of cars.

There is some truth to what you say about younger grandparents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Karysa said:

This was an avoidable tragedy and the grief and guilt must be unbearable. I think that it would be a nice gesture for RCCL to cover funeral costs, and grief counseling for the family and for any that witnessed it as a goodwill gesture without admitting guilt. It kind of sickens my stomach that a family would actually try to benefit financially from a death of a child unless there was clear negligence of another and again, in this case it just seems like her death was from a lapse of judgement from someone who loved her very much.

Why should Royal Caribbean cover any of the costs, they were not at fault, especially since the family is blaming them and has retained an attorney to sue them?  In the eyes of many, if they were to cover costs, it would be an admission that they did something wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, NLH Arizona said:

Why should Royal Caribbean cover any of the costs, they were not at fault, especially since the family is blaming them and has retained an attorney to sue them?  In the eyes of many, if they were to cover costs, it would be an admission that they did something wrong.

I totally understand that way of thinking and I would say that is ok to. This little girl’s family will likely need some counseling and she will need some sort of funeral and in her memory I think covering the costs would be a nice gesture, again without admitting guilt as I do not see RCCL at fault here.

Edited by Karysa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Karysa said:

I totally understand that way of thinking and I would say that is ok to. This little girl’s family will likely need some counseling and she will need some sort of funeral and in her memory I think covering the costs would be a nice gesture, again without admitting guilt as I do not see RCCL at fault here.

They have raised over $11,800 on a Fundly page to help with funeral, travel, unpaid medical expenses and they say that any funds collected in excess of the above will be used to provide educational resources for Chloe's siblings.  Not sure if there is also a Go Fund Me page.

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, NLH Arizona said:

They have raised over $11,800 on a Fundly page to help with funeral, travel, unpaid medical expenses and they say that any funds collected in excess of the above will be used to provide educational resources for Chloe's siblings.  Not sure if there is also a Go Fund Me page.

    

Uh....from what I understand the child's mother is an attorney (I may be wrong) and her father is a policeman.  I'm not sure why there is a collection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, NLH Arizona said:

Why should Royal Caribbean cover any of the costs, they were not at fault, especially since the family is blaming them and has retained an attorney to sue them?  In the eyes of many, if they were to cover costs, it would be an admission that they did something wrong.

Good point.  Why would Royal cover anything for the family given the family is being hostile towards Royal by retaining a lawyer who’s made it clear extracting $$$$$ from Royal is a primary objective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, April42749 said:

Uh....from what I understand the child's mother is an attorney (I may be wrong) and her father is a policeman.  I'm not sure why there is a collection.

Nowadays everyone seems to be doing it.  I think if people want to do it, it is fine that their friends and family can contribute to their needs.  Plus, you never know someone's financial situation, even if they have good paying jobs.  I hope the family raises enough to cover their needs, but in no way do I think Royal Caribbean should pay for any of their expenses, since they are not at fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Peachypooh said:

There is some truth to what you say about younger grandparents. 

 

Definitely some truth to this about "younger grandparents".

 

Despite our UserID, we aren't [yet] that old.

HOWEVER... we are older than we used to be!  [Quite a surprise, eh?]

 

Point is:  With some grands about 15 years ago, we were fine watching them.

However, with some newer grands, much as we'd have liked to do the same, I had to tell the parents that I just didn't feel it was safe for us to be fully in charge outside/in public places.  I felt that if the little guy suddenly dashed off, I might have trouble keeping up/getting to him in time, before he maybe got in trouble.

Fifteen years ago?  I had no difficulty dashing off after a little one and apprehending them FAST, even when wearing heels, and indeed, I had to do that a few times!

Not so sure now, even not in "heels".  (Chances are, with an adrenaline surge, I'd be lightning fast... but it's not an experiment I want to take!)

 

But as mentioned, when we took a little one on a cruise, there were 2 parents and 2 grandparents, and there were ALWAYS *two* adults specifically agreeing to keep an eye on the little one, until there was a specific, official "change in oversight".  It was just too much of a new and unusual place, with too many potential risks.  Even the heavy doors to outside decks could do quite some damage to assorted body parts, etc.

Just not worth it!

And IF we had felt that it would be too onerous of a burden, we shouldn't have invited the little one.  As it was, there were usually all 4 of us with him, as that was part of the enjoyment of being together.

 

I simply cannot imagine lifting a little one high like that.  IF there was "something special to see", then lifting them to maybe chin level to "see" should be more than enough!  The entire body doesn't need to "see"!

 

GC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Peachypooh said:

There was a study done (can't remember where but it was in a medical journal) that they compared injury

rates with parents, babysitters and grandparents. Injuries that happened when the grandparents had

the kids were much lower. That said I know both my parents and my in-laws at times have not used

good judgement so I used to watch them like a hawk and almost never let them watch them when they

were little. It all comes down to the individual person. 

 

https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2008/bishai-grandparents.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...