Children, Women and Men Last - Not sure this is the best order of abandoning ship

[ducklite]

What a terrible thing to say :mad:

 

Really? So you'd want your husband left behind? Or your father?

 

Seriously, there are more than enough lifeboats for all, and an orderly boarding rather than trying to argue over who gets on and who doesn't is going to be the most efficient wayt to get people off a ship.

[Zeno]

"First come, first served" means the strong should feel free to trample the weaker (children, the elderly and small women) - now that's "fair" - extreme sarcasm intended!!!

[Hunwolf]

The people criticizing ducklite on here would likely be the first ones diving headlong into the lifeboat. ;)

[seeh2o]

I think in most cases men are more physically stronger than women, because our bodies are built different, therefore i think they have more chance at survival.

and of course i don't expect men to wait for me to get out of the burning building before they do, but then again when you run "outside" of burning building, there will be enough space for all, unlike life boat where there are limited spaces, so you can't really compare those two.

 

anyways, I don't wanna get into the whole feminist movement for equality or old "antiquated tradition". I stated my reason on top and that's my opinion.

 

I'm a strong swimmer and, yes, my body is built differently - I have two natural floatation devices that "most" men don't have (though I've seen some lounging around the pool who do have their own!) that actually help me stay buoyant when I swim.

 

Disabled, old and young first. As far as women first, that's antiquated thinking and insulting to half of the human race. All we have on this earth is each other and we should be helping each other, not every person for themselves.

[GrandmaHofmann]

My father was in the merchant marine and navy many years. Whenever I am at lifeboat drill, I remember him saying that when a ship is sinking, generally only half the lifeboats can be launched. Doesn't make me feel secure.

[Paris182]

In passing I read your comment. I can only agree that this shows an amazing lack of taste at at time when the question is not academic. I have to say that it also brings to mind the sad case of the Andrea Doria.

[gentlemancruiser]

In reality when a disaster strikes, panic sets in very quickly and everyone runs to save their life. Last year there was a small earth quake that rocked the office tower where I work. Someone on a different floor pulled the fire alarm and immediately everyone evacuated. The building couldn't keep people from running out. In previous safety drills we had been told not to leave a building until it was considered safe.

 

Stopping the flow will only cause more panic and possible disasters.

[CanadianMommyof2]

While I don't want it to sound as harsh as saying "first come, first served" I do believe that if the orders where delivered in a better way things might not have gotten so out of control. First they said to get in the lifeboats, then back out...no one knew what to do. It's the fear that causes people to react the way they did. If they would have just started to load people immediately and everyone saw that people we getting into the boats in an organized fashion then it probably wouldn't have caused the panic or crowds of people. A lot of the passengers went back to their cabins and got life vests so it wasn't like everyone was there all at once but it was the fact that everyone was standing around waiting that the fear probably started to set in and that is when people take things into their own hands. This is just my opinion because I wasn't there but I believe that the crew was doing the best they could with what they were dealing with and until you are put into an emergency situation it is unknown how you are going to handle the stress no matter how much training you have. The crew have people above them that should have been giving them direction and if the captain infact left the ship early then there probably wasn't much direction being given at all. Again, JMO

[KatetheWanderer]

The fact that this basic rule of abandoning ship is now in dispute indicates that this tragedy will spark the clarification and hopefully improvement of existing emergency procedures on these ships. These muster drills are a joke when you think about it. You learn how to operate your life jacket and where to assemble. The fact remains we are at the mercy of a rogue wave, a bomb or an inept captain when we are at sea.

 

Reportedly, many of the male Concordia passengers thought the rule was wrong and refused to obey the crew's orders causing even more chaos. It took an hour for the ship to empty. Reports indicate people fought to get on the ferries. Women might be good swimmers but men will win in combat. If that is the new rule, then in a high body count ship tragedy, men will likely outnumber women and children among the survivors. I doubt any official adherence to the old rule would make a difference in the modern age. Bravo to the men who would honor it anyway but the ships shouldn't try to force chivalry into emergency evacuations if it is likely to be ignored. I am in my early fifties and have lived a good life. I'd give up my own place for my barely grown son but I doubt he would take it. He is that increasingly rare type who instantly gives up his seat on a bus to a lady. Even though I'm female, I hope I wouldn't get onboard a lifeboat or a ferry if all of the children and their mothers weren't on first.

 

http://www.wikihow.com/Escape-a-Sinking-Ship

 

"A recent study theorized that your sense of etiquette might vary with the speed of the ship's sinking.[4] Frey, Savage, and Torkler's study[5] found that more women and children survived the sinking of the Titanic than on the Lusitania, where more young men and women survived. The Lusitania sank in 18 minutes, whereas the Titanic sank in 2 hours, 40 minutes, and the study concluded that selfish behavior dominates when people are under pressure to survive, whereas social norms and status hold when the pressure is less evident, causing those who behave like gentlemen to end up losing their lives. In addition, the chivalrous behavior of British men has been posited as a reason for why more of them lost their lives on the Titanic than American men, who were thought to display more individualistic behavior.[6] Make of that what you will!"

[IRL_Joanie]

that's why i guess first come first serve works, if you're old, weak, disabled and can't get to the life boat on time? tough noogie! maybe better luck next life.

 

I am so sorry that you feel this way. I truly hope you are saying this in jest and not really meaning it...

 

If you are not saying this in jest, then all I can say is God Bless you and I pray you never have to face such a situation and have to make a choice of whom to save or not:(

 

Joanie

[ducklite]

During the safety drill on my most recent cruise, we were reassured several times that there was more than adequate space in the lifeboats and pods for all passengers, and in the case of emergency, families wold not be split up.

 

And I also want to think that they talked about how the lifeboats could deploy even from a heavily listing ship.

[MoreLemonPledge]

There is a huge difference between the concepts of "every man for himself" and "first come first served". The former implies selfishness, the latter implies logic and orderly evacuation. I think it is ridiculous to put one persons safety ahead of anothers based on gender or perceived relative degree of infirmity. Just load the boats as people present themselves in an orderly, non-discrimminatory fashion.

 

And for those proudly declaring they would be chivalrous gentlemen in this situation - those are easy declarations to make from the comfort of your living room. I suspect things might be different than you choose to delude yourself into believing when faced with your own imminent mortality.

 

You shouldnt need an essay of your relative "worth" to board a life vessel. And the lack of external body parts shouldn't play in either.

[IRL_Joanie]

I am of the old school, and yet not old.... That being said, it should always be children women, elderly (of both sexes) and Handicapped (of both sexes again) first. It is called chivalry, something for which in this day and age is being forgotten all to fast. Does not mean I am sexist, it meas I have a soul and feel that what is right should be done. Even if it means I do not get into a life boat. I will wait my turn and be a lady. I sure hope men will be gentlemen and let the children and women first even if it means you stay behind in order that your children may live.

 

Joanie

[boaterette]

Quite frankly I think that whoever is at the lifeboat load them on. Just get everybody off the ship. The quickest way possible. Why would you want to hold people up waiting for someone to go collect all of the disabled. Makes no sense to me. Load them as soon as they get there. So yes first come first serve. Better chance of saving everyone.

[MoreLemonPledge]

I am of the old school, and yet not old.... That being said, it should always be children women, elderly (of both sexes) and Handicapped (of both sexes again) first. It is called chivalry, something for which in this day and age is being forgotten all to fast. Does not mean I am sexist, it meas I have a soul and feel that what is right should be done. Even if it means I do not get into a life boat. I will wait my turn and be a lady. I sure hope men will be gentlemen and let the children and women first even if it means you stay behind in order that your children may live.

 

Joanie

 

Not that long ago it was believed that class and race should also factor in under situations such as this. I think we would all agree that is an antiquated notion. So, why should a father potentially leave his children fatherless so that an old woman should live? You would willingly look those children in the eye and tell them that their daddy has to die so that someone else could live?

 

My point is that no HUMAN BEING deserves priority over any other HUMAN BEING. Everyone should be treated equally, always.

[MoreLemonPledge]

Quite frankly I think that whoever is at the lifeboat load them on. Just get everybody off the ship. The quickest way possible. Why would you want to hold people up waiting for someone to go collect all of the disabled. Makes no sense to me. Load them as soon as they get there. So yes first come first serve. Better chance of saving everyone.

 

Exactly.

[luvwater]

I wanted to say you can't judge a book by it's cover. On the outside, my husband is a forty year old fit male appearing all is OK ... something people do not see is the insulin pump attached to his body needed for him to live. The pump is not meant to be in water which means his life line would be cut off if he was required to swim. For those women that feel they should be first I feel bad for your husbands. If you traveled together, you should stay together.

[Milaandra]

I think it's fair to make announcements saying, There are enough lifeboats for all, but for those who are strong and are willing to wait and allow others to board ahead of them--Thank you!--and please step aside so we can board people as quickly as possible.

 

Nice! Plus, how many able-bodied men are going to say "no, take me! I'm weak!" :D

 

Ideally, it would be 1. children with primary caregiver 2. non-swimmers 3. the physically disadvantaged and the elderly 4. everyone else But that would be a bit difficult to sort out at the time, wouldn't it? I wish we could just count on the better qualities of human nature to determine the order, but based on the accounts of this incident, it seems not.

[MoreLemonPledge]

Nice! Plus, how many able-bodied men are going to say "no, take me! I'm weak!" :D

 

Ideally, it would be 1. children with primary caregiver 2. non-swimmers 3. the physically disadvantaged and the elderly 4. everyone else But that would be a bit difficult to sort out at the time, wouldn't it? I wish we could just count on the better qualities of human nature to determine the order, but based on the accounts of this incident, it seems not.

 

This is your personal list for priority boarding.. Why? Why do you choose to value human life in a hierarchical order? Who polices? Who enforces? How much precious time is lost? Get 'em off quick. Don't worry about who is more worthy. Does a doctor go before a convicted felon? A nurse before a carpenter? You just don't have the right to prioritize human life. Attempt to evacuate as many as possible as quickly and safely as possible.

[Milaandra]

For those women that feel they should be first I feel bad for your husbands. If you traveled together, you should stay together.

 

It's all individual cases, isn't it? In my case, I would increase my husband's chance of survival if I got on the darn boat. He was on the swim team in high school and is still in pretty good shape. I can't swim a stroke and would panic. He'd end up trying to save me and I'd at least slow him down, if not drag him down.

[Milaandra]

This is your personal list for priority boarding.. Why? Why do you choose to value human life in a hierarchical order? Who polices? Who enforces? How much precious time is lost? Get 'em off quick. Don't worry about who is more worthy. Does a doctor go before a convicted felon? A nurse before a carpenter? You just don't have the right to prioritize human life. Attempt to evacuate as many as possible as quickly and safely as possible.

 

No, no, no! It's a list based on trying to save as many lives as possible by protecting the most vulnerable first. Not the value of those lives.

 

So, did you really think that I was suggesting that healthy adult swimmers were less valuable life forms? C'mon.

[mn311601]

Why are adult males automatically assumed to be good swimmers? I haven't been swimming since I was a kid, and never in the ocean. I don't think I'm swimming to shore. Just get everyone on the boats, and no one is more important than anyone else. I can't believe that in the age of equality women would put up with being thought of as more important than a man's life.

[AWorldCruise4Me]

I am of the less abled first philosophy. In the old days that meant women and children. Women's clothes (corsets and such) and lack of physical fitness opportunities made this true. Nowadays less abled probably means most of the cruise ship passengers since many are elderly or really, really out of shape.

 

That being said I can't believe the mothers who would volunteer their seats to their adult or nearly adult sons would have raised sons who would sit secure in their seat while a woman with a 3 yr old child stood on deck.

 

The fact is in modern day ship evacuations the life boats are the easy and most comfortable way off the ship. Then there is jumping in the water to be picked up by boats or being helicoptered off. This was true for the MTS Oceanos and appears to be what happened for the Costa Concordia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTS_Oceanos

If you read about the MTS Oceanos all passengers survived. In the 30 ft swells boats could not dock up to rescue people so people were asked to jump in the water and were pulled out. In addition a helicopter rescue was going on. It took 7 hrs and 16 helicopters were used.

 

The fact of the matter is that if you have a small child with you, you could not have easily handled the jump in the water or helicopter rescue. But able bodied people could. One elderly man fell from the helicopter rescue but miraculously lived.

 

If given the situation where I was in charge of loading a boat I would put the children and their mothers on first and then the elderly. If a man was there with a small child I would put him on to. If I was in a group on a ship waiting to load and there were more children and elderly than could be accommodated I would hold back. Modern technology gives the able bodied multiple ways to get off the ship through other boats coming to the rescue and helicopters. People trying to manage a listing ship who are responsible for little ones are who are physically disabled may not be able to hang on long enough whereas fully abled adults have the best chance.

 

This is a good video to watch about a real life rescue.

 

That is the short summary video.

This is a 6 part video series that shows what happens when the most able bodied men decide their lives are worth more and take the life boats and go. In this case it was the captain's staff. The captain tried to get away too. But the entertainers grabbed him back. When the helicopter's came to rescue the captain jumped in front of the women and children to get himself on.

 

Keep watching through all the 6 videos. Thankfully there was an entertainment staff who felt they, as the more able bodied of those who were left, decided to help the less abled. All lived.

[MoreLemonPledge]

No, no, no! It's a list based on trying to save as many lives as possible by protecting the most vulnerable first. Not the value of those lives.

 

So, did you really think that I was suggesting that healthy adult swimmers were less valuable life forms? C'mon.

 

No, I think that your list takes time to enforce. Precious time that results in slowing down and impairing the evacuation process. This could ultimately end up in an unintended preferential prioritizing of human life.

 

I stand by get 'em off quick. No time for interviews about what squads you may have captained in high school.

[mn311601]

I'm not talking about a ship that's not in eminent danger. If you have 3 hours to load a lifeboat, that's fine I don't mind waiting my turn. If the ship is going down in 30 minutes, you better believe I'm not going to stay behind for someone I don't know. Human nature isn't to sacrifice, it's to survive. I'm 26, I'm not going to be "chivalrous" and chance not surviving if I can help it.