Sick Child-Familythrown off ship (merged)

[wrp96]

Maybe we can all start a new trend for the threads on here::D

 

You forgot:

 

Cooking for 3,000+ people is different than cooking for less than 100.

All 3,000 people on the ship can't have a chair right by the pool

I realize the world does NOT revolve around me

No you can't make that 9am flight

[Head Shot]

 

:D

[FL_Cruiser64]

You forgot:

 

Cooking for 3,000+ people is different than cooking for less than 100.

All 3,000 people on the ship can't have a chair right by the pool

I realize the world does NOT revolve around me

No you can't make that 9am flight

 

LMAO

 

That is a good one. :D

[zantedeschia]

The article was so slanted, I was compelled to send feedback on the website, something I don't normally do.

 

One thing no one has mentioned, I think they were very fortunate that they landed in a port that 1) had a US consulate that 2) was within walking distance and 3) was open. A lot of people have this misconception that every port has a US consulate that's open and at our beck and call.:eek:

[rolloman]

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.

 

WRONG- No age limit at all. I have attached a link so your can get the facts.

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/features/articles.cfm?ID=628

[abitaturbodog]

I thought that the Doctors on board were not employed by the cruise line, but instead were independent contractors. I also thought that because of this, their actions could not be held against the cruise line and passengers couldn't sue the cruise line for something a Doctor did, or didn't do.

 

If this is so, then why does this family expect RCI to pay for the decision of the ship's Doctor?

 

I'm also thinking that $450 for passports for 5 people (in a couple of hours) is a pretty good deal! My family of 4 paid $380 and waited months, so someone's getting a discount...

 

In the family's defense, before I knew about Cruise Critic, I had never heard of travel insurance. I would venture to bet that the vast majority of vacationers aren't even aware that you can buy travel insurance.

 

I think that if it was my family, I would be thankful that the ship's doctor realized his limitations in treating a baby and made us go to a hospital for proper treatment.

[Cruise Cat]

WRONG- No age limit at all. I have attached a link so your can get the facts.

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/features/articles.cfm?ID=628

 

Well, she did say "Cruise Lines", not RCCL in particular. As you can see in the link you posted RCCL seems to be the outlier in not having a minimum age limit as the others listed in the article do. Also, I don't count any Cruise Critic Article as "fact". As you can see by the attached link to the RCCL Cruise Contract as posted on their website, they do have minimum age requirements. The Cruise Critic article was incorrect.

 

 

Carnival Cruise Lines

Minimum Age to Sail: The minimum age to sail is 4 months old.

 

Cunard Line

Minimum Age to Sail: For Atlantic crossings and many of the exotic itineraries: 1 year old; for other sailings: 6 months old. Be sure to check ahead of time.

 

Disney Cruise Line

Minimum Age to Sail: The minimum age to sail is 12 weeks old

 

Norwegian Cruise Line

Minimum Age to Sail: The minimum age to sail is 6 months old.

 

Royal Caribbean

Minimum Age to Sail: There is no minimum age to sail

 

http://www.royalcaribbean.com/content/en_US/pdf/CTC_Not_For_BR.pdf[/url] ]

c. Pregnancy and Infants - Any Passenger who will enter the 24th week of pregnancy by the

beginning of, or at any time during their cruise or CruiseTour agrees not to book the cruise or

board the Vessel or Transport under any circumstances. No infants under a specific age (at

least six (6) months for most cruises but twelve (12) months for other cruises) shall be booked

on a cruise or CruiseTour, nor brought onboard the Vessel or Transport by any Passenger under

any circumstances. The most current minimum age requirements are available online at

http://www.royalcaribbean.com

[PantherFan]

I wonder if the family was given any options.

 

A family of 5, let's see Mom or Dad could of gotten off with baby and rest stayed with other parent onboard.

 

So now people are going to scared about reporting sickness onboard...:eek:

[aurelius180]

Maybe we can all start a new trend for the threads on here::D

 

- I Didn't Get Kicked Off My Cruise Ship

- We Got Exactly What We Paid For On Our Cruise

- Ship Drink Prices About the Same As Local Bars

- As Expected, We Did Not Get Upgraded

- Someone Explain The Rules So I Do Not Violate Them

- Captain Made A Great Decision

- Ship's Doctor Made A Great Decision

- Reading My Cruise Contract First Avoided Misunderstanding

- Troublemakers Thrown Off Cruise Ship - Passengers Cheer!

- World Economics Force Fuel Surcharge - Passengers All Understand

- Captain Alters Course To Avoid Hurricane - Possibly Saves Lives

 

 

Now what would that sell? Stories of people doing their job wonderfully doesn't sell. If it did make the news people would think it's news media bias.

 

And where I'm from the drinks on cruise lines are a bit lower than most bars around here and you don't even get to look out a window overlooking the ocean! ;)

[Merion_Mom]

I thought that the Doctors on board were not employed by the cruise line, but instead were independent contractors. I also thought that because of this, their actions could not be held against the cruise line and passengers couldn't sue the cruise line for something a Doctor did, or didn't do.

 

If this is so, then why does this family expect RCI to pay for the decision of the ship's Doctor?

 

I'm also thinking that $450 for passports for 5 people (in a couple of hours) is a pretty good deal! My family of 4 paid $380 and waited months, so someone's getting a discount...

You are right. Here is the quote from the story:

 

"The embassy issued them emergency passports for $455. They spent another $650 on plane tickets back to Florida. The emergency room bill was $600. All together, the Cortes family spent more than $3,000 on their disastrous vacation and they want a refund."

 

If those are "real" passports, good for 10 years, that's less than $100 per person, including photos. Obviously we don't know the length of their validity.

 

$650 for five to fly is pretty darn cheap. If you assume that they baby was a lap-sitter, $650 for 4 is still cheap. ($162.50 each) This would have been covered by trip insurance IF THEY HAD IT.

 

ER bill for $600??? Sounds way cheap to me. Those can easily end up in the thousands.

 

In the family's defense, before I knew about Cruise Critic, I had never heard of travel insurance. I would venture to bet that the vast majority of vacationers aren't even aware that you can buy travel insurance.

 

ANY website that books travel has an automatic add-in or pop-up for travel insurance. Any land-based travel agent tries to sell you travel insurance. It's almost impossible to avoid the suggestion. They (or you) may have rejected it, thinking that it wasn't necessary, but it would surely have been obviously available.

[Merion_Mom]

P.S. If you assume that they would INFLATE rather than DEFLATE their total, then the cruise cost them AT MOST $1300. For five, that comes to $260 per person for a four night cruise.

 

Pretty darned cheap in the first place.

[mollyeilis]

It's interesting, how when you have mainstream views, it's easy to decide the the ship MD did the right thing.

 

But when you're like me, you can easily see the other side.

 

I have also, in the past when I was a frequent visitor and poster here, read stories of ship doctors waiting quite a bit of time before letting the guests know that they needed to be quarantined.

 

Therefore, I do NOT believe that they visited the doctor at night. I believe they went during the day, if they went at all, I believe that the MD and ship staff later on talked about it, and then late at night the decision was made, the staff came to the door, and that is when everything happened.

 

And the way the story is told, I can't prove I'm right and neither can others with their views. Nowhere in the story does it say that they went there at night, it was said that they were told to leave at night.

 

 

 

As I posted before, reading between the lines, the family was told to leave the ship for medical reasons. Instead they returned to their cabin and the mother got ready for bed.

 

I barely have to read between any lines and I get a different timeline.

 

 

... they had already gotten ready for bed (changed into pajamas) when they took her to the infirmary.

 

Doesn't say they took her, and definitely doesn't say when they did.

 

...don't cruise with infants or very young children....a cruise ship is no place for them.

 

Eh. The world is filled with germs. If parents leave kids with grandparents (assuming there ARE grandparents in the picture, which there aren't with us) they are bringing home alllll those germs on their clothes, hair, in their body...hardly any difference.

 

 

 

Hmm, thought I had more quoted. :)

 

I would trust an ER MD over a ship doctor. A bill of only $600 does not seem to indicate that anything was done for the kiddo. If nothing was done, then nothing horrible was wrong.

 

 

My kid has ALWAYS started ANY illness with throwing up. On me. Until this last cold he had, which started with throwing up on DH. bwa ha ha. It's just how he does it. Now, we've never been worried about him, b/c he's always been a voracious nurser, even when sick. He would nurse nurse nurse, throw up, and 2 minutes later nurse some more. I've never been worried about him for that reason.

 

Therefore, if WE were the people on the cruise, we would be butting heads in the situation (by the way, the story says that there were 5 of them...some posters here seem to have made an assumption that this was their only child, but coudn't this baby have been their THIRD child, meaning they have experience?) b/c I wouldn't be worried at all unless DS changed his voracity, but others would be worried b/c I didn't have pedialyte or whatever (mama milk = nature's pedialyte, LOL) or didn't think baby needed an IV, etc.

 

My guy hit his head at Target in November, and aside from the ER doc's bill and the ambulance bill (I know that head wounds bleed a lot, but he changed personalities and that's what had me calling 911), the ER bill was well over 4K. They did a big bunch of nothing, b/c nothing was really wrong. By the time we got there DS had gone back to normal, and once they got it cleaned up we could see what a TINY cut he had (he fell on a metal clothing rack base, it could have been far FAR worse). Once I could see that he was OK and that nothing was wrong, YOU BET I started worrying about money. I even asked the ER nurse if the blanket that the ambulance put on him was going to be paid for by us, and if so I would take it...it was going to be paid for by us, they would just toss it, and it's now ours. Once I knew he was OK I was thinking about the money nonstop (we had just, the day before, signed up for a high deductible insurance plan so we knew what was coming).

 

But the point is, they irrigated DS's scalp, they put a little thing of numbing stuff on just in case the irrigation was going to hurt him, and that's IT. And it was 4K, just for the ER bill not including the doctor.

 

A bill of $600 means they didn't do much at all, which means she wasn't very sick.

 

 

The fact that RCCL is compensating these people for the cruise cost (in the form of a future cruise) is a clear statement that they feel responsible. It can't be taken as anything else! It's laughable to think that RCCL isn't saying "oops, my bad" with the offer of a cruise. When a series of medical errors (mis-diagnoses and missed diagnoses) (and yes those are plural, not mis-spellings) killed my mom, the doc billed my stepdad. My stepdad wrote back to let him know what errors the doctor's office had done, what they had missed, and how very badly they had done their jobs...the doctor's office never billed again. Clear statement of guilt (stepdad was not interesting in suing, but I was, and I tried to explain that the doc not billing for the office visits and treatment leading up to mom's death was absolute guilt but he woudln't hear it).

 

If RCCL didn't feel that something was done wrong, or differently than they normally do, I highly doubt they would have offered that. I've never heard of them offering that before for illness on a ship!

 

 

I like RCCL, I'm not against them. Only reason we haven't cruised with DS yet (well, DS earthside...I was brand newly pg with him on our honeymoon a week after our wedding, and it was a sudden lack of tolerance for Mango Tango that made me really realize that I was pg well before an EPT could have told me so) was b/c we used cloth diapers and we were unwilling to use disposables or have a week's worth of dipes in the cabin. We would have gone in an instant if I were willing to compromise on dipes or if we could afford Disney with their washers on board, and would go in an instant now if we weren't going to Disneyland all this year, LOL. And we're planning on it for next year for his b'day!

 

I loved our cruise with them and will go again, but I do think they feel that something is their fault, due to their compensating the family in that way...

[cs]

I loved our cruise with them and will go again, but I do think they feel that something is their fault, due to their compensating the family in that way...

 

I have to disagree here. Compensating the family isn't an automatic sign of guilt. Maybe they felt bad that the family missed their cruise because of a sick child. Knowing how bad they wanted to stay on the ship (begging the ship employess to let them stay) maybe RCL thought it would be a nice gesture on their part to help the family have another cruise sometime in the future.

 

I know that there's a lot of "maybes" in that paragraph but them helping the family with future cruise credit doesn't necessarily scream guilt.

[Chigirlcruzin]

But the point is, they irrigated DS's scalp, they put a little thing of numbing stuff on just in case the irrigation was going to hurt him, and that's IT. And it was 4K, just for the ER bill not including the doctor.

 

A bill of $600 means they didn't do much at all, which means she wasn't very sick.

 

 

 

You can't compare a US hospital bill to a Bahamas hospital bill. One of my friends got food poisoning at Atlantis and became dehydrated. She had to stay 2 nights. Bill came to $800, which she had to pay in full before leaving. They don't have the insurance and profit centers in their health care system that we do, so they can't charge nearly as much.

 

This is an interesting thread. Bottom line is, we don't know the full story. I do think it's sensational reporting - I find it hard to believe a cruise line would be so callous to paying customers.

[Lady Chew]

she wasn't very sick.

 

 

The fact that RCCL is compensating these people for the cruise cost (in the form of a future cruise) is a clear statement that they feel responsible. It can't be taken as anything else!

If RCCL didn't feel that something was done wrong, or differently than they normally do, I highly doubt they would have offered that. I've never heard of them offering that before for illness on a ship!

 

 

For many large corporations, it is cheaper to pay off someone who is suing them, than it is to pay all the legal fees involved to fight the charges.

[PhoenixCruiser]

It it NOT RCCL's fault that the family didn't have Travelers Insurance :mad:

 

Should RCCL be expected to reimburse everyone who incurred excepted expenses? I don't think so!!

 

###

[nrdsb4]

It's interesting, how when you have mainstream views, it's easy to decide the the ship MD did the right thing.

 

But when you're like me, you can easily see the other side.

 

I have also, in the past when I was a frequent visitor and poster here, read stories of ship doctors waiting quite a bit of time before letting the guests know that they needed to be quarantined.

 

Therefore, I do NOT believe that they visited the doctor at night. I believe they went during the day, if they went at all, I believe that the MD and ship staff later on talked about it, and then late at night the decision was made, the staff came to the door, and that is when everything happened.

And the way the story is told, I can't prove I'm right and neither can others with their views. Nowhere in the story does it say that they went there at night, it was said that they were told to leave at night.

 

 

 

 

 

I barely have to read between any lines and I get a different timeline.

 

 

 

 

Doesn't say they took her, and definitely doesn't say when they did.

 

 

 

Eh. The world is filled with germs. If parents leave kids with grandparents (assuming there ARE grandparents in the picture, which there aren't with us) they are bringing home alllll those germs on their clothes, hair, in their body...hardly any difference.

 

 

 

Hmm, thought I had more quoted. :)

 

I would trust an ER MD over a ship doctor. A bill of only $600 does not seem to indicate that anything was done for the kiddo. If nothing was done, then nothing horrible was wrong.

 

 

My kid has ALWAYS started ANY illness with throwing up. On me. Until this last cold he had, which started with throwing up on DH. bwa ha ha. It's just how he does it. Now, we've never been worried about him, b/c he's always been a voracious nurser, even when sick. He would nurse nurse nurse, throw up, and 2 minutes later nurse some more. I've never been worried about him for that reason.

 

Therefore, if WE were the people on the cruise, we would be butting heads in the situation (by the way, the story says that there were 5 of them...some posters here seem to have made an assumption that this was their only child, but coudn't this baby have been their THIRD child, meaning they have experience?) b/c I wouldn't be worried at all unless DS changed his voracity, but others would be worried b/c I didn't have pedialyte or whatever (mama milk = nature's pedialyte, LOL) or didn't think baby needed an IV, etc.

 

My guy hit his head at Target in November, and aside from the ER doc's bill and the ambulance bill (I know that head wounds bleed a lot, but he changed personalities and that's what had me calling 911), the ER bill was well over 4K. They did a big bunch of nothing, b/c nothing was really wrong. By the time we got there DS had gone back to normal, and once they got it cleaned up we could see what a TINY cut he had (he fell on a metal clothing rack base, it could have been far FAR worse). Once I could see that he was OK and that nothing was wrong, YOU BET I started worrying about money. I even asked the ER nurse if the blanket that the ambulance put on him was going to be paid for by us, and if so I would take it...it was going to be paid for by us, they would just toss it, and it's now ours. Once I knew he was OK I was thinking about the money nonstop (we had just, the day before, signed up for a high deductible insurance plan so we knew what was coming).

 

But the point is, they irrigated DS's scalp, they put a little thing of numbing stuff on just in case the irrigation was going to hurt him, and that's IT. And it was 4K, just for the ER bill not including the doctor.

 

A bill of $600 means they didn't do much at all, which means she wasn't very sick.

 

 

The fact that RCCL is compensating these people for the cruise cost (in the form of a future cruise) is a clear statement that they feel responsible. It can't be taken as anything else! It's laughable to think that RCCL isn't saying "oops, my bad" with the offer of a cruise. When a series of medical errors (mis-diagnoses and missed diagnoses) (and yes those are plural, not mis-spellings) killed my mom, the doc billed my stepdad. My stepdad wrote back to let him know what errors the doctor's office had done, what they had missed, and how very badly they had done their jobs...the doctor's office never billed again. Clear statement of guilt (stepdad was not interesting in suing, but I was, and I tried to explain that the doc not billing for the office visits and treatment leading up to mom's death was absolute guilt but he woudln't hear it).

 

If RCCL didn't feel that something was done wrong, or differently than they normally do, I highly doubt they would have offered that. I've never heard of them offering that before for illness on a ship!

 

 

I like RCCL, I'm not against them. Only reason we haven't cruised with DS yet (well, DS earthside...I was brand newly pg with him on our honeymoon a week after our wedding, and it was a sudden lack of tolerance for Mango Tango that made me really realize that I was pg well before an EPT could have told me so) was b/c we used cloth diapers and we were unwilling to use disposables or have a week's worth of dipes in the cabin. We would have gone in an instant if I were willing to compromise on dipes or if we could afford Disney with their washers on board, and would go in an instant now if we weren't going to Disneyland all this year, LOL. And we're planning on it for next year for his b'day!

 

I loved our cruise with them and will go again, but I do think they feel that something is their fault, due to their compensating the family in that way...

 

 

You make a whole lot of assumptions based on ???? While it doesn't say what time the family visited the infirmary, there is nothing in that article to remotely suggest that the "MD and staff later talked about it and made a decision late that night" Wow, is all I can say. And why would that even matter? Assuming that happened, I don't see anything wrong with that. Perhaps the situation was nagging at him all day, he started thinking "what if the baby gets worse and here we are out in the middle of the ocean? I'm not comfortable I have the expertise/technology/medications on hand to handle this situation if it becomes critical. Maybe it would be best for the child to be seen at a hospital by a pediatrician."

 

It is never the "wrong decision" to refer a sick infant to a specialist for further evaluation if the doctor doesn't feel that his facility has the means to handle the infant if it should get worse. By the family's own admission, their 7 month old was vomiting and had diarrhea to the degree that they became very concerned.

 

Again, making a lot of assumptions about the baby's condition based on your own child's medical history, not on THIS child's condition and pediatric standard of practice. It's a good thing most doctors don't do the same. I have been in the medical profession for years and I will say again that it is always better to err on the side of caution. Once that ship left for the high seas, it could have escalated to fatal proportions. And then we'd be reading about how the MD was "negligent" by not referring the family to a hospital.

 

I really feel for doctors nowaday, they are damned if they do and damned if they don't, and all too often these judgments come from people who absolultely know nothing about disease/medicine/realities of health care.

[lv2bcruzin]

I think RCI did the right the thing, though inconvenient for the family. To say the least if I was in that families situation and my 2 year old had issues that could not be handled by the onboard physician, you better be damn sure I'm doing whatever I can to get the proper treatment. I would expect the cruiseline to be concerned and caring. Anything above that would be extra.

 

As many others have said. This could've been a totally different story, if the doctor decided to be "kind" and not suggest the family leave the ship and then you had a infant death onboard. With some people you can't win and in this situation that seems to be the case. Because, you can bet that same family who is complaining about their treatment would be suing for improper care if they were told all is ok and the baby died.

 

When traveling outside the U.S. you take the chance of many things and that is the point of travel insurance. I for one have yet to use it, knowing that if something does happen it is going to be $$$$$ out of my pocket. But, that is my choice. The same choice this family made. To be uninformed and unprepared is the fault of the traveler and no one else.

 

"Improper planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine." .... as the old saying goes.

 

P.S. I do feel for the family and the situation. Regardless of my views on how it was handled, it is very unfortunate that the familly and especially the infant had to deal with that.

[Merion_Mom]

 

My kid has ALWAYS started ANY illness with throwing up. On me. Until this last cold he had, which started with throwing up on DH. bwa ha ha. It's just how he does it. Now, we've never been worried about him, b/c he's always been a voracious nurser, even when sick. He would nurse nurse nurse, throw up, and 2 minutes later nurse some more. I've never been worried about him for that reason.

Molly, my child, too, would regurgitate a large quantity of just-consumed milk, and then go on nursing like nothing was wrong. That's not vomiting.

 

These people SAID, on the tape (did you watch it or just read the story?), that she was vomiting and HAD DIARRHEA. Did your son ALWAYS start ANY illness with vomiting and diarrhea?

 

What the Cortes family is saying is definitely NOT what you are describing.

 

They are also quoted as saying that they thought that little Zoie was SEASICK. I am sorry - diarrhea is NOT a symptom of seasickness!

 

Therefore, if WE were the people on the cruise, we would be butting heads in the situation (by the way, the story says that there were 5 of them...some posters here seem to have made an assumption that this was their only child, but coudn't this baby have been their THIRD child, meaning they have experience?) b/c I wouldn't be worried at all unless DS changed his voracity, but others would be worried b/c I didn't have pedialyte or whatever (mama milk = nature's pedialyte, LOL) or didn't think baby needed an IV, etc.

It's not clear in the story who the five people were, but in the TV news video, there are two boys sitting in the room with the parents and Zoie.

 

Molly, have you read all of the posts, or did you read the story and then just skim? The ship was leaving Nassau. The next stop is CocoCay. There are NO medical facilities there. It would have been a NIGHTMARE if the child had seized, or become dehydrated, or any other negative development.

 

It is all well and good to say that $600 is nothing and proves that they didn't do anything for the baby. It doesn't prove that her presenting symptoms weren't alarming and that the best thing to do was to let them sail and hope for the best.

 

Also, look at the obvious exaggerations. We are specifically told what it cost them: $455 for emergency passports, $650 for airfare, $584 for the hospital bill. That's NOT what the interviewer says. She says, "And it cost them thousands of dollars to get home."

 

To me, that speaks volumes about the accuracy of the entire report.

 

Good to see you back on the boards, though! :)

[DrivesLikeMario]

The article is full of sensationalistic writing. The author should be ashamed. Not only does the author say the family "bought 5 tickets", he calls the ship a "boat" and uses an article title that is so slanted! This article belongs in a tabloid. :rolleyes:

[chrisbd1]

When my little (then) brother was 9 months old, my mom took him to our pediatrician because of diarrhea. Our pediatrician gave her to him some pedialite and sent him home. 4 hours later his eyes looked sunk into his head and his diarrhea was worse. My mom, having been a mother for 15 years, realized that my brother was REALLY sick and took him to the emergency room. He was admitted with server dehydration/gastrointestinal distress and spent 2 days in the hospital. She was told, had she waited until morning he would have died. You don't mess around when an infant gets diarrhea.

 

The DR on RCCL reported-vomiting/diarrhea, possibility of SERVE DEHYDRATION. Since there was that possibility, getting emergency help is paramount. Royal Caribbean did the right thing. The parents should have had passports and travel insurance. Period.

[flczr]

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:

 

I am an EMT and belive me I have had that happen to me:rolleyes: . I have also arrived at a call lights and siren to find the patient waiting at the curb with his bags already packed and waitng to go.:eek:

[neworlensladi]

All I can say is while I personally have loved every cruise I've taken with RCL, just knowing this happened to one passenger is enough for me to never cruise with them again.

 

This is inarguably, INarguably, the behavior of a company that does not value its passengers nor care about them beyond the boarding gates.

 

It's not just how insulting the ship's behavior was, which was insanely cruel, but not even taking the courtesy to reimburse them for the charges they accrued as a result of trying to get home I find, well, frighteningly indifferent on a human rights level.

 

Sorry to sound so dramatic, but this really struck a cord with me, because I was on a cruise with 30+ family for a reunion, and my close cousin had a 9 month old with her, and it could have easily happened to her.

 

This should never be tollerated, esp. in cruising circles.:mad:

 

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

[HurricaneSally]

All I can say is while I personally have loved every cruise I've taken with RCL, just knowing this happened to one passenger is enough for me to never cruise with them again.

 

This is inarguably, INarguably, the behavior of a company that does not value its passengers nor care about them beyond the boarding gates.

 

It's not just how insulting the ship's behavior was, which was insanely cruel, but not even taking the courtesy to reimburse them for the charges they accrued as a result of trying to get home I find, well, frighteningly indifferent on a human rights level.

 

Sorry to sound so dramatic, but this really struck a cord with me, because I was on a cruise with 30+ family for a reunion, and my close cousin had a 9 month old with her, and it could have easily happened to her.

 

This should never be tollerated, esp. in cruising circles.:mad:

 

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

 

 

That would make you not use RCCL again? You must be kidding.

[PhoenixCruiser]

Sorry to sound so dramatic, but this really struck a cord with me, because I was on a cruise with 30+ family for a reunion, and my close cousin had a 9 month old with her, and it could have easily happened to her.

 

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

 

Hopefully your family purchased insurance for the cruise, the Cortes family didn't and took the risk.

 

###