Oasis returning to port?

[bluegirlum]

What a horrible story! I hope the child is ok too.

 

I don't know if lifeguards are the answer. I have friends who were lifeguards who said that parents used them as an excuse to not pay attention to their kids. "Oh, there's a lifeguard. They'll be fine." The lifeguard is there as last resort and often the parents would get upset at the lifeguard for calling out their precious baby for misbehaving. I think like anything else, as many have said, it's parental responsibility. That said, I can't even imagine how that poor family must be feeling and it serves and a reminder to me

To just be extra vigilant.

[cello56]

One of the problems with the idea of RCI providing lifeguards for limited times and limited pools is that it fosters a false sense of security. If some parents are lax in watching their kids NOW when there are no lifeguards, imagine how much more lax those ones would be if lifeguards were present. These are not the kind of parents who are reading the times and following the rules. Oasis class of ships have over a dozen different water zones. You could not realistically expect a lifeguard to cover more than one zone. So you would need a dozen or so lifeguards on duty.

 

Perhaps as check in every parent needs to sign a statement that they acknowledge the fact that all pools are unsupervised, and that they need to be responsible for their children at all times. Have the paper in every language needed. Have the check in person address the kids and tell them that they are not allowed to swim without a responsible adult with them.

 

We need to stop avoiding talking about this issue. Drownings are going to continue to happen until all parents understand their responsibilities.

 

When our son was a child there was a community pool in a local park. It went from one foot to three feet deep. If you were under 9, you were not allowed to enter the fenced in pool area unless you had a adult with you. The adult had to sit right on the edge of the pool, or be in the water with you. No exceptions.

[mlmbar]

I hope this poor child has a complete recovery but he may have a long road ahead of him.

 

Bottomline - it is the parents' responsibility to watch their children lifeguard or not! I am a retired teacher and over the years I have seen parents

expect the school/teachers to be responsible for non academic matters. If you are not ready to be responsible for another person , don't have a child! If you want a stress free vacation, leave your kids home! OR send them to the kids' club on the ship where a responsible adult will watch your child!

[Jason008]

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/fl-oasis-of-the-seas-child-emergency-20150103-story.html

 

 

Copyright © 2015,*Sun Sentinel

Edited January 4, 2015 by Host Jacquelyn
Copyright

[bluegirlum]

One of the problems with the idea of RCI providing lifeguards for limited times and limited pools is that it fosters a false sense of security. If some parents are lax in watching their kids NOW when there are no lifeguards, imagine how much more lax those ones would be if lifeguards were present. These are not the kind of parents who are reading the times and following the rules. Oasis class of ships have over a dozen different water zones. You could not realistically expect a lifeguard to cover more than one zone. So you would need a dozen or so lifeguards on duty.

 

Perhaps as check in every parent needs to sign a statement that they acknowledge the fact that all pools are unsupervised, and that they need to be responsible for their children at all times. Have the paper in every language needed. Have the check in person address the kids and tell them that they are not allowed to swim without a responsible adult with them.

 

We need to stop avoiding talking about this issue. Drownings are going to continue to happen until all parents understand their responsibilities.

 

When our son was a child there was a community pool in a local park. It went from one foot to three feet deep. If you were under 9, you were not allowed to enter the fenced in pool area unless you had a adult with you. The adult had to sit right on the edge of the pool, or be in the water with you. No exceptions.

 

Is there anything in the language that we agree to as passengers saying that by going on the cruise and using their facilities, we waive the right to hold rCI responsible for incidents such as drownings, etc. ? Not that people read this or it would prevent something like this, but I think this kind of thing is sort of implicit. I'm always amazed by the people I meet on cruise ships who can't swim. Adults! Yet the get loaded and go in the pool. There are so many issues that need to be addressed. This was probably just a horrible accident--we may never know.

[bluegirlum]

One of the problems with the idea of RCI providing lifeguards for limited times and limited pools is that it fosters a false sense of security. If some parents are lax in watching their kids NOW when there are no lifeguards, imagine how much more lax those ones would be if lifeguards were present. These are not the kind of parents who are reading the times and following the rules. Oasis class of ships have over a dozen different water zones. You could not realistically expect a lifeguard to cover more than one zone. So you would need a dozen or so lifeguards on duty.

 

Perhaps as check in every parent needs to sign a statement that they acknowledge the fact that all pools are unsupervised, and that they need to be responsible for their children at all times. Have the paper in every language needed. Have the check in person address the kids and tell them that they are not allowed to swim without a responsible adult with them.

 

We need to stop avoiding talking about this issue. Drownings are going to continue to happen until all parents understand their responsibilities.

 

When our son was a child there was a community pool in a local park. It went from one foot to three feet deep. If you were under 9, you were not allowed to enter the fenced in pool area unless you had a adult with you. The adult had to sit right on the edge of the pool, or be in the water with you. No exceptions.

 

Is there anything in the language that we agree to as passengers saying that by going on the cruise and using their facilities, we waive the right to hold rCI responsible for incidents such as drownings, etc. ? Not that people read this or it would prevent something like this, but I think this kind of thing is sort of implicit.

Furthermore, who's going to enforce it? The same people who won't even enforce the towel/chair hogging?

 

I'm always amazed by the people I meet on cruise ships who can't swim. Adults! Yet the get loaded and go in the pool. There are so many issues that need to be addressed. This was probably just a horrible accident--we may never know.

[bigeck]

Thanks for posting.

That's the reason for the return last night

[dz9yvr]

The circular "wave pool" is a difficult place to watch any child. The water is 3 ft deep and it is an elevated pool with an obstruction in the center. It is impossible to sit in a spot and watch the entire pool. There are windows on the side but they only go down about half way, so somebody could be on the bottom and it would be difficult to see them. In addition a large part of the pool is blocked by the stairs and loading area.

 

The pool is open today but it does not appear that the moving water is operating.

[bigeck]

http://cruiseforums.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2145218

 

Thanks to Jason, we can now stop the speculation and CC abuse.

[celebrity]

I want to know where the parents were when this occurred. No excuse for their lack of supervision. 😡

Prayers are being being sent for that poor child.

[71Corvette]

Thoughts and prayers for this patient and the family. Hopefully everything is ok.

 

When I was younger and in the boy scouts I was taught the buddy system. It's a simple but effective way to ensure safety while swimming. No child goes in the water without a buddy. If your buddy gets out, you get out too. If you have more than one child the kids can serve as each others buddy. If you have an only child that means you become your child's buddy.

 

This is how we've handled it with our kids. We also watch them while they're in the pools but we recognize that anyone can become distracted no matter how vigilant they plan to be. The buddy system gives us extra peace of mind.

[reallyitsmema]

The circular "wave pool" is a difficult place to watch any child. The water is 3 ft deep and it is an elevated pool with an obstruction in the center. It is impossible to sit in a spot and watch the entire pool. There are windows on the side but they only go down about half way, so somebody could be on the bottom and it would be difficult to see them. In addition a large part of the pool is blocked by the stairs and loading area.

 

The pool is open today but it does not appear that the moving water is operating.

 

A person can easily stand beside the pool or be in the pool and watch their young child.

[kajee75]

The article does not say that the parents were not present. They may have been watching but lost track of the child. Is there a wave pool separate from the flow rider? I can't imagine that a child as young as 4 would be allowed on the flow rider.

[Duke Mazer]

100% agree Lifeguards are not a replacement for parents. This kid could have been under for as much of 10 minutes! Brain damage starts after only 4 minutes. A decent amount of lifeguards scanning the pools should have been able to catch it earlier and a matter of minutes can make a difference.

 

It's easy to say the parents should have done this or that, but honestly we don't know, maybe the sibling was having issues and the got distracted. Feel horrible for them we all make mistakes as parents no on is perfect and certainly no one should be going through the hell, I'm sure they are in.

[brenderlou]

I'm sure it was the circular wave pool in the H20 zone. It has a good current that floats you around. Was in it with our 10 yr old and water depth was to my waist so for a 4 yr old it would be over their head.

I also think it's wrong to bash the parents. Who knows what happened and just be glad it wasn't you and your child.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited January 4, 2015 by brenderlou

[brenderlou]

I want to know where the parents were when this occurred. No excuse for their lack of supervision. 😡

 

Prayers are being being sent for that poor child.

 

 

Wow! No excuse for this post. Were you there? Step back and don't assume something you know nothing about.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[reallyitsmema]

The article does not say that the parents were not present. They may have been watching but lost track of the child. Is there a wave pool separate from the flow rider? I can't imagine that a child as young as 4 would be allowed on the flow rider.

 

It is a round, current pool that is called the lazy donut. It is about 3 feet deep and has a current that takes you round and round. It was likely over the head of a 4 yr old.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

Wow! No excuse for this post. Were you there? Step back and don't assume something you know nothing about.

Actually, we'd agree with that other poster - asking where the parents were (for supervision) is the first question most folks would reasonably ask.

 

A 4-year old aboard a ship should be supervised at all times - there are simply too many places to get into risky situations.

 

Perhaps more answers/information will be posted later.

 

Wonderfully, the boy was revived, and hopefully recovers fully.

[time4u2go]

There's a wave pool?

[Ocean Boy]

http://cruiseforums.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2145218

 

Thanks to Jason, we can now stop the speculation and CC abuse.

 

And even that thread doesn't have it all straight as part of it makes is sound like the child was on the flowrider and not the kids' water park.

 

But at least we don't have to deal with meaningless statements now like the child "split his/her head open".

[brenderlou]

Actually, we'd agree with that other poster - asking where the parents were (for supervision) is the first question most folks would reasonably ask.

 

 

 

A 4-year old aboard a ship should be supervised at all times - there are simply too many places to get into risky situations.

 

 

 

Perhaps more answers/information will be posted later.

 

 

 

Wonderfully, the boy was revived, and hopefully recovers fully.

 

 

I agree with you but not the previous post re: no excuse for lack of supervision. Tragic accidents happen. Perhaps each parent thought the other was watching or any # of scenarios. It's wrong and inappropriate to assume the child was left unsupervised. Some posters just love to point fingers and jump to conclusions. Compassion for the situation is what is needed.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited January 4, 2015 by brenderlou

[aloha43]

If a 4 year old child is anywhere near the water, let alone in (or near) a wave pool that is too deep.....then yes, there is some kind of lack of supervision happening here.

 

I would never allow my 4 yr old be anywhere near the water without being sure one of us was watching him EVERY SECOND.

[Tenderpaw]

While i admit my first thought was "wonder where his parents were", as a parent i know how easy it is to lose track occasionally or think the other parent has the child.

 

Once, i thought my 5 yr old was inside the house with my wife when i left, however, he followed me out as i was going to the car. As i backed out of the garage, he was standing on my side of the car looking at me meaning he passed right behind the car. I could have easily backed over him. Thank God he got past before I backed up. He's 15 now and has been on 14 cruises.

 

Dave

[naturalbeauty2011]

It's sad, I've been on many cruises and always see kids running around while the adults relax. I'm pretty sure these people didn't mean for it to happen, but you gotta keep your kids close, it only takes one second. Also life jackets! My son can't go near water without one.

[Little Buddy's Mom]

Why was a new thread started about this? I was hoping there was some new information but there's not. There's already over 100 posts about the accident and nothing new has been posted for several hours.