Should cruise ships have lifeguards ???

[A2Mich]

You forgot a couple of things;

 

5) the cruise line will provide, free of charge, a pair of handcuffs and a gag for use on each child under the age of 16 - you are strongly advised to use them!

 

6) Henceforth, the sportcourt area will be turned into a kiddies Guantanamo Bay facility for the kiddies who dare to be kids.:rolleyes:

 

Good ideas. However, what exactly do with the adults who show behavior worse than the kids?

[A2Mich]

Especially not 190 degree ones that should be served at a much lower temperature. I mean 3rd degree burns and you still think that is OK ???

 

I watched a show on the McDonald's incident, and this woman was so horribly burned. It made me sick to see. Horrible, horrible burns. The coffee should have never been to that temperature. It's very common for folks to place their drinks from fast-food restaurants between their legs while they juggle their other food. Very common! That poor woman was burned so badly that she had to have repeated surgeries. Never should that happen from coffee served to a patron!

 

Back to the original topic: I would like to see lifeguards at the pools. While on a cruise with my granddaughter, there was actually a girl her age (10 years old) swimming in the pool while her parents were out and about doing other things. She ran all around the cruise ship alone the entire cruise. All day.

 

 

That's about the right temperature for coffee - actually should be closer to 200 degrees. How is McDonald's responsible for STUPID??? Granted this is a long shot here, but wouldn't a person with two licks of COMMON SENSE (what's that?) realize that coffee is HOT, and that maybe putting the cup in her crotch might not be a good idea. I should have been one of those personal injury attorneys.....making money for idiots by suing big business and inflating prices for everyone else.

 

We can all argue over what temperature coffee and other drinks should be served at, and maybe some people feel that 190 degrees is too hot. However, that does not absolve users from using (here we go again) a little bit of common sense and actually.........wait for it......TAKING SOME PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS! OMG - WHAT A CONCEPT!

[AmazedByCruising]

3) Any person under the age of 16 using a pool without the presence of a responsible adult will be removed to a safe location and that person and the irresponsible adult who was not present will be removed from the ship at the next port without any compensation

 

 

"Why wasn't my son removed from the pool as you even promised in writing?" :rolleyes:

 

Also, if the company makes very strict rules about being a responsible parent regarding pools, they basically tell you that everything is safe on the ship except the pools. So people will start complaining that they didn't mention anything about falling after drinking too much, kids falling from the stairs, losing money in the casino, being robbed during an excursion, etc. It's a slippery slope argument, I know.

 

I feel that adults should be treated by the ship as being responsible for their own actions and able to care for their children and themselves. Even when they aren't.

[donaldsc]

For much less than the cost of lifeguards, cruise ships could have forms printed up and distributed to all passengers with their cruise documents providing essentially the following:

 

1)There are no lifeguards on the ship.

2)Passengers use pools at their own risk.

3) Any person under the age of 16 using a pool without the presence of a responsible adult will be removed to a safe location and that person and the irresponsible adult who was not present will be removed from the ship at the next port without any compensation

4)By signing and returning this form I accept full responsibility for myself and any minors travelling with me.

 

Not only would such required acknowledgement (or something comparable) save the cruise line money, it would incentivize many parents to behave responsibly, thereby achieving the desired goal of reducing the likelihood of drownings.

 

I believe that most ships have a "no lifeguard on duty" sign by the pool although the absence of the lifeguard should be obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than 15. If not, just add such a sign.

 

Maybe the ship should also add a sign or require a release for everyone who is using the stairs on a ship because you can miss a step and fall down and hurt yourself. What about a "cut your food into small enough pieces so you do not choke" sign in the dining room.

 

I get sick and tired of having to sign releases for anything and everything that I do. Let me tell you a little release story. As some of you may be aware, they have what are called "climbing trees' in Australia. They are very high trees with an observation platform on top and used to be used to watch for fires. The way you get to the top is by large nails driven into the side of the tree. No restraints. Nothing to keep you from falling except your own common sense. The trees are in isolated places so there is nobody there to make you sign a release. They do however have a sign on the bottom of the tree that says "Climb at Your Own Risk". I decided to try one of these trees. I got maybe 15 or 20 feet high and decided that it was stupid to go any higher and came down. The people who were climbing ahead of me accepted the risk and got to the top.

 

Another "protect me from myself" story" and then I will quite my diatribe. The Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas has a water feature inside where you can take gondola rides. The water in the canal is maybe 1 foot or so deep. They actually make people who take these rides wear seat belts. Yes, I know that you can drown in only a few inches of water if you are dumb enough. However, the people who do drown in inches of water deserved it.

 

DON

Edited April 4, 2015 by donaldsc

[A2Mich]

I believe that most ships have a "no lifeguard on duty" sign by the pool although the absence of the lifeguard should be obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than 15. If not, just add such a sign.

 

Maybe the ship should also add a sign or require a release for everyone who is using the stairs on a ship because you can miss a step and fall down and hurt yourself. What about a "cut your food into small enough pieces so you do not choke" sign in the dining room.

 

I get sick and tired of having to sign releases for anything and everything that I do. Let me tell you a little release story. As some of you may be aware, they have what are called "climbing trees' in Australia. They are very high trees with an observation platform on top and used to be used to watch for fires. The way you get to the top is by large nails driven into the side of the tree. No restraints. Nothing to keep you from falling except your own common sense. The trees are in isolated places so there is nobody there to make you sign a release. They do however have a sign on the bottom of the tree that says "Climb at Your Own Risk". I decided to try one of these trees. I got maybe 15 or 20 feet high and decided that it was stupid to go any higher and came down. The people who were climbing ahead of me accepted the risk and got to the top.

 

Another "protect me from myself" story" and then I will quite my diatribe. The Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas has a water feature inside where you can take gondola rides. The water in the canal is maybe 1 foot or so deep. They actually make people who take these rides wear seat belts. Yes, I know that you can drown in only a few inches of water if you are dumb enough. However, the people who do drown in inches of water deserved it.

 

DON

 

 

Amen. It's sad when you have to try and protect people from their own stupidity. Like the joke on Facebook goes: "I think we should remove all warning labels from everything and let the problem sort itself out." Process of natural selection--the smart can survive and the stupid can perish.

[navybankerteacher]

I believe that most ships have a "no lifeguard on duty" sign by the pool although the absence of the lifeguard should be obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than 15. If not, just add such a sign.

 

Maybe the ship should also add a sign or require a release for everyone who is using the stairs on a ship because you can miss a step and fall down and hurt yourself. What about a "cut your food into small enough pieces so you do not choke" sign in the dining room.

 

...

 

DON

There is an essential difference: arising from what is often referred to as "common practice". While stairs and steaks in restaurants all represent potential risks to the stupid, irresponsible, incompetent, and, in some cases, the simply unfortunate; there is no standard of negligence which could be utilized by an ambulance chaser to seek compensation for a stupid, irresponsible, incompetent or unfortunate person who gets hurt. There are, however, enough locations (certainly not universal, but enough for said ambulance chaser to hang his hat) where people swim which do have lifeguards.

 

That practice - even if it is not universal - makes swimming pools different from other locations where stupid, incompetent, irresponsible or simply unfortunate people can do harm to themselves.

[AmazedByCruising]

There is an essential difference: arising from what is often referred to as "common practice". While stairs and steaks in restaurants all represent potential risks to the stupid, irresponsible, incompetent, and, in some cases, the simply unfortunate; there is no standard of negligence which could be utilized by an ambulance chaser to seek compensation for a stupid, irresponsible, incompetent or unfortunate person who gets hurt. There are, however, enough locations (certainly not universal, but enough for said ambulance chaser to hang his hat) where people swim which do have lifeguards.

 

That practice - even if it is not universal - makes swimming pools different from other locations where stupid, incompetent, irresponsible or simply unfortunate people can do harm to themselves.

 

That argument would imply that a swimming pool is known to be a safe place because there are often lifeguards. Even with lifeguards, however, people still drown in swimming pools. Maybe people expect swimming pools everywhere to have lifeguards, but they will also know that pools are more dangerous than a restaurant. Even with a lifeguard, who in their right mind loses sight of a 4 year old near a wave pool?

[Karysa]

My youngest are 19 and swimmers.

 

I can't imagine seeing lifeless children being lifted out of a cruise ship pool and then continuing on with my cruise. That's a YES to Lifeguards from me. I know it may seem selfish but I would not be relaxed at the end of that vacation so flame me if you must.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Karysa

[navybankerteacher]

That argument would imply that a swimming pool is known to be a safe place because there are often lifeguards. Even with lifeguards, however, people still drown in swimming pools. Maybe people expect swimming pools everywhere to have lifeguards, but they will also know that pools are more dangerous than a restaurant. Even with a lifeguard, who in their right mind loses sight of a 4 year old near a wave pool?

 

Not at all - it only implies that the presence of a lifeguard encourages irresponsible parents to leave their children in potentially dangerous situations. Children have drowned in pools where lifeguards have been on duty. The best way to protect young children is to make it abundantly clear to parents that they MUST NOT let their children swim without watching them.

[Karysa]

Not at all - it only implies that the presence of a lifeguard encourages irresponsible parents to leave their children in potentially dangerous situations. Children have drowned in pools where lifeguards have been on duty. The best way to protect young children is to make it abundantly clear to parents that they MUST NOT let their children swim without watching them.

 

What would you propose to do to parents that didn't watch their children in the pool?

 

I propose to kick them off the ship at the next port . That or a huge fine, or not allowing them to book another cruise are the only punishments that I think might work. What are your suggestions on how to making parents watch their children at the pool?

[A2Mich]

I saw this same show and much of what you were hearing about the incident was mis-reported and just plain wrong. I was also along the lines of "you can't cure stupid" until the show about the lawsuit came to my attention. McDonald's had many, many complaints about serious burns from their coffee before this woman sued.

 

 

 

I'm against suing anyone UNLESS there's a valid reason. She had a valid reason and McD's has since changed the temperature of their coffee. It's still hot, but it won't melt the flesh off your bones the way it did to the woman in the case.

 

 

 

As for the original issue, I don't think there should be lifeguards on board. Parents never really get to take a vacation from watching out for their kid's safety. Do they?

 

 

Well I can see coffee being too hot. The part about putting a cup of hot coffee between her legs in the car is HER STUPIDITY not the fault of McD's. Coffee should be brewed at 200 degrees. Regardless of the temperature of the coffee, which indeed may have been too hot, it does not absolve her of personal responsibility. You can't always protect people from themselves. Is it the car manufacturer's fault if you get into their brand new car and drive through a red light, get t-boned and seriously injured or killed (assuming there were no mechanical failures where the vehicle couldn't stop)? No. You took responsibility for the proper and safe operation on that vehicle when you turned the key. No person with any common sense would place a paper or foam cup full of hot liquid between their legs---period. If they're that dumb--that's on them. However with today's ridiculous personal injury lawyers and number of stupid people out there, this is what we're stuck with. Warning labels on everything to try and protect people from their own stupidity. A friend of mine once told me that there is generally no such thing as an accident--in the majority of cases, whatever happened occurred because of human error--someone screwed up at something. Majority of car "accidents" happen because someone was at fault for something. The number of true "accidents" would actually be very low.

[griffy116]

No. You need to take the responsibility for your own kids.

 

DON

 

We have cruised with my Grandson, nephews, nieces with the youngest being my Grandson at 3 years old. We would never have left them unattended, even if the ship had a lifeguard. We always had more than one person watching them or actually in the pool with them. Too many things can happen in a split second to trust this to a lifeguard. Part of the fun is watching the kids enjoying the pool and part of it is making sure that no one is bothering them and they aren't bothering others by splashing adults, respecting the space of others. Part safety, part common sense, part respect for others.

[dsrdsrdsr]

There is an essential difference: arising from what is often referred to as "common practice". While stairs and steaks in restaurants all represent potential risks to the stupid, irresponsible, incompetent, and, in some cases, the simply unfortunate; there is no standard of negligence which could be utilized by an ambulance chaser to seek compensation for a stupid, irresponsible, incompetent or unfortunate person who gets hurt. There are, however, enough locations (certainly not universal, but enough for said ambulance chaser to hang his hat) where people swim which do have lifeguards.

 

That practice - even if it is not universal - makes swimming pools different from other locations where stupid, incompetent, irresponsible or simply unfortunate people can do harm to themselves.

 

This is true, but not really relevant IMO. That particular difference only matters to a person who (a) has not the wit notice whether or not there is a lifeguard; and (b) behaves in a different manner, to the extent that he does things which he knows may drown him, because he knows the lifeguard is there.

 

If staircases had 'stair-guards', would people deliberately jump down them 4 steps at a time? If restaurants had 'food-guards', would people deliberately swallow lumps of food to large for them? Anyone who changes their behaviour because there are lifeguards present - whether they are swimming or watching over children - is a fool. Even in a pool with guards, you must be prepared to be 100% responsible for yourself and your family.

[cruisead]

Two of our four sons were lifeguards, one at a municipal pool and the other at a resort. They had more stories of how many parents used the pool and adjacent areas as daycare for their kids.

 

As for the laws, if US laws can't govern things like disability issues and cruising, do you honestly think they're going to get laws pertaining to lifeguards? Things like that are why ships are registered in places like Malta and Nassau.

[A2Mich]

Two of our four sons were lifeguards, one at a municipal pool and the other at a resort. They had more stories of how many parents used the pool and adjacent areas as daycare for their kids.

 

 

 

As for the laws, if US laws can't govern things like disability issues and cruising, do you honestly think they're going to get laws pertaining to lifeguards? Things like that are why ships are registered in places like Malta and Nassau.

 

 

Well in all honesty, cruise ships are registered in foreign nations mainly for cost saving matters, generally taxes, minimum wage thresholds, overtime regulations, etc.

[donaldsc]

 

As for the original issue, I don't think there should be lifeguards on board. Parents never really get to take a vacation from watching out for their kid's safety. Do they?

 

What world do you live in.? Parents assume that someone else will watch their kids all the time.

 

DON

[ontheweb]

I'm not sure I would trust the cruise line employees for this type of job.

 

One of our first cruises was on the NCL Crown (no longer in their fleet).

 

At one point there were so many children jumping into the pool despite the signs that that was not allowed, that the pool was unusable for anyone else. it was their camp. And supposedly supervising the children and not caring about the safety rules were the camp counselors!

[DirtyDawg]

I'm not sure I would trust the cruise line employees for this type of job.

 

One of our first cruises was on the NCL Crown (no longer in their fleet).

 

At one point there were so many children jumping into the pool despite the signs that that was not allowed, that the pool was unusable for anyone else. it was their camp. And supposedly supervising the children and not caring about the safety rules were the camp counselors!

 

If the cruise lines install lifeguards let's hope they hire professional ones like the staff who run the physical plant or the officers who run the bridge, or the chiefs who prepare the food. I hope they don't hire more camp counselors, or more dancers to pretend to be Lifeguards.

[navybankerteacher]

She never put the coffee there. That was part of the mid-reporting.

 

You are incorrect. - unless you believe a person's knees are not on their legs. While she was not driving, she did place the cup between her knees then removed the top to add cream and sugar.

[A2Mich]

You are incorrect. - unless you believe a person's knees are not on their legs. While she was not driving, she did place the cup between her knees then removed the top to add cream and sugar.

 

 

If knees are indeed the case, then the stupidity is strong with this one. While not doubting the coffee may have been hotter than maybe it should have been, once that cup passes through the window, it's up to the consumer to use good judgement and "common sense" on how to proceed from there. While I may be no expert, I would have put the cup in a cup holder and added the cream and sugar there, after pulling over into a parking spot---but, that's just me.