Shame Royal Caribbean- Ovation of the Seas

[Jimbo]

Sounds like a crazy rule to me.........say when you leave the pier and then after sailing half way into the cruise find out because of 1 reason or another the ship can't make it 's last 2 ports stops followed by 2 sea days to get back home.

 

So what do they do in that situation? 4 sea days in a row? 

[lazydayz]

That sucks, but at least Royal gave them a refund and a hotel for the night.

 

I, like one other poster said, would have had one parent and the seven year old cruise.  

[Deeliteful]

Wow! Why blame the OP for something that changed at the last minute! Of course it would be upsetting.

Why are there so many people with zero empathy on these boards? They would rather shoot the messenger than empathise with a sad situation.

 

Feel for you 😢

[twangster]

Royal's policy regarding infants is consistent with the cruise industry.  

 

Carnival Infant Policy:

 

• Infants must be at least 6 months of age at the time of embarkation in order to sail. Children must be at least 12 months of age at the time of embarkation to sail on trans-ocean crossings and remote itineraries, where there are more than 2 consecutive sea days
• This policy is in place due to the infant's vulnerable health. While at sea or in port the availability of medical care may be limited or delayed. Early infant care, in particular may require specialized diagnostic facilities and/or treatment that are not obtainable during the cruise on board the ship or ashore in ports of call.

Princess Infant Policy

 

Minimum Age Requirements:

• Infants must be at least 6 months of age at the time of embarkation in order to sail.
• Children must be at least 12 months of age at the time of embarkation to sail on trans-ocean crossings and remote itineraries, where there are more than 2 consecutive sea days.

NCL Infant Policy

 

 

Traveling with Infants:

• At least six (6) months of age on the day of boarding
• At least twelve (12) months of age on the day of boarding if your cruise has 3 or more consecutive days at sea.

 

Royal Caribbean Infant Policy

 

INFANT POLICY

• Infants sailing on a cruise must be at least 6 months old as of the first day of the cruise and/or CruiseTour. HOWEVER: For transatlantic, transpacific, Hawaii, select South American and other selected cruises and/or CruiseTours, the infant must be at least 12 months old as of the first day of the cruise/CruiseTour. For the purposes of this policy, any cruise that has 3 or more days consecutive at sea will require infants to be 12 months old on the first day of the cruise/CruiseTour.
• Please be aware that guests travelling with a young infant that does not meet the infant policy will be denied boarding. No refunds or other compensation shall be due from the cruise line to anyone as a result of the denial of boarding to an underage infant or other accompanying guests.

As offered previously this is an unfortunate situation that resulted from the itinerary change.  Subsequent itinerary changes due to weather further complicated the issue.  However none of the cruise lines above would have let an infant board with the revised itinerary.   Proximity to land is irrelevant.  

 

Hopefully this thread can help others learn about the considerations when cruising with infants.

[Ourusualbeach]

2 minutes ago, twangster said:

Royal's policy regarding infants is consistent with the cruise industry.  

 

Carnival Infant Policy:

 

• Infants must be at least 6 months of age at the time of embarkation in order to sail. Children must be at least 12 months of age at the time of embarkation to sail on trans-ocean crossings and remote itineraries, where there are more than 2 consecutive sea days
• This policy is in place due to the infant's vulnerable health. While at sea or in port the availability of medical care may be limited or delayed. Early infant care, in particular may require specialized diagnostic facilities and/or treatment that are not obtainable during the cruise on board the ship or ashore in ports of call.

Princess Infant Policy

 

Minimum Age Requirements:

• Infants must be at least 6 months of age at the time of embarkation in order to sail.
• Children must be at least 12 months of age at the time of embarkation to sail on trans-ocean crossings and remote itineraries, where there are more than 2 consecutive sea days.

NCL Infant Policy

 

 

Traveling with Infants:

• At least six (6) months of age on the day of boarding
• At least twelve (12) months of age on the day of boarding if your cruise has 3 or more consecutive days at sea.

 

Royal Caribbean Infant Policy

 

INFANT POLICY

• Infants sailing on a cruise must be at least 6 months old as of the first day of the cruise and/or CruiseTour. HOWEVER: For transatlantic, transpacific, Hawaii, select South American and other selected cruises and/or CruiseTours, the infant must be at least 12 months old as of the first day of the cruise/CruiseTour. For the purposes of this policy, any cruise that has 3 or more days consecutive at sea will require infants to be 12 months old on the first day of the cruise/CruiseTour.
• Please be aware that guests travelling with a young infant that does not meet the infant policy will be denied boarding. No refunds or other compensation shall be due from the cruise line to anyone as a result of the denial of boarding to an underage infant or other accompanying guests.

As offered previously this is an unfortunate situation that resulted from the itinerary change.  Subsequent itinerary changes due to weather further complicated the issue.  However none of the cruise lines above would have let an infant board with the revised itinerary.   Proximity to land is irrelevant.  

 

Hopefully this thread can help others learn about the considerations when cruising with infants.

Disney is the same.  Makes me wonder if this is a SOLAS or some other regulatory body’s policy that the cruise lines have to adhere to.  That would certainly explain why they don’t vary from it.  

[twangster]

Just now, Ourusualbeach said:

Disney is the same.  Makes me wonder if this is a SOLAS or some other regulatory body’s policy that the cruise lines have to adhere to.  That would certainly explain why they don’t vary from it.  

 

All cruise lines have medical consultants at their disposal.  I'm not sure if SOLAS goes so far as to advise on infant considerations from a medical perspective. 

 

All developed nations have doctors that specialize in pediatric care.  It's a specialized area of medicine because children and infants are different from adults.  Infants in particular are a challenge because they can't speak or articulate a symptom other than crying.  

 

When my children were at that stage I had many late night runs to a pharmacy trying to buy something to reduce a fever or solve an ear infection or some other ailment.  In a few hours if our own self diagnosis didn't work we ended up taking them to a children's hospital at odd hours.  None of that is available on a ship in the ocean.  

 

These things never seemed to occur in the middle of the day, it was always the middle of the night.  It got easier with subsequent children but the first child was a learning curve.  A new parent dealing with a crying infant with a fever on a ship at sea sounds like a nightmare to me not only for the parents but any guests near them.  

 

Also consider that while an 8 month old immune system is better than a 4 month old immune system it still isn't fully developed at that stage.  Some infants are more prone to catching something that the rest of us handle with ease without even knowing our immune system just spared us.

 

I have little difficulty understanding this policy.  I find it very appropriate for all the right reasons.

Edited February 13, 2020 by twangster

[Blitzburggirl]

I guess I don't understand all the folks saying they understand the policy. It's not really about the policy. The policy is great. Love it!

What it is about is literally, a change to the itinerary the day of boarding (while the ship is spending the night in the harbor nonetheless) and literally refusing boarding just sucks. No nice way to say it. This is not an instance of poor planning on the OP's part.

 

What happens if the the ship as at sea for 2 days and is unable to dock or tender to the port for the third day? Do they toss the infants overboard? Surely there is precedent for accommodation in this case. At the minimum a waiver to sign offered. (Which, as a parent, I would have signed.) 

 

I also agree that I would have made every effort to have at least one adult and the 7 year old sail, and demanded refund for those refused boarding.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Blitzburggirl

[KelSny1011]

I hope the poster comes back and let's us know their family was able to make the best out of a very unfortunate situation.  

 

Never knew a policy like this existed. Good to know although my baby days are over.  

[Billy Baltic]

Op. I feel for you. One of our kids had his 1st birthday on a cruise and I wasn’t aware of this policy. 
While it is policy and available to know before a cruise, I do feel the whole thing reeks of lawyers.

From a purely medical perspective, it makes no sense for them to say they can’t care for an 11 month old for 3 days but they can care for a 13 month old for several days of a transatlantic. 
 

I hope you get to enjoy an alternative family holiday very soon. 

[twangster]

1 hour ago, Blitzburggirl said:

What happens if the the ship as at sea for 2 days and is unable to dock or tender to the port for the third day? Do they toss the infants overboard? Surely there is precedent for accommodation in this case. At the minimum a waiver to sign 

 

Mid cruise such a change leaves no alternative but to proceed.  If someone is sick on boarding day they will block them from boarding.  If someone becomes sick mid cruise they don't kick them off.  

 

Part of the issue is the geography and distance from Sydney to any ports of call.  Especially when one port of the few in the area closes to cruise ships.  

 

I thought about staying on for the next cruise but talking with some crew it became an unattractive itinerary with a port lost when the port banned cruise ships.  A few days later weather became a factor further impacting the itinerary.  

 

We don't see this often in the US or Med because there are many alternative ports. 

 

1 minute ago, Billy Baltic said:

From a purely medical perspective, it makes no sense for them to say they can’t care for an 11 month old for 3 days but they can care for a 13 month old for several days of a transatlantic. 

 

Infants mature at different rates.  Despite that they have to create a standard to follow and create policy.  Many books on infant development break it down to months of age.  It's not perfect but used universally for many things related to infant care. Developmentally there is a huge difference between an 11 and 13 month old.  Just ask any parent.  

[CoolNickname]

4 hours ago, Oceansaway17 said:

I must say even if an infant or anyone is really ill, isn't two days or one day of some concern as well.  What makes 3rd day so different.

Honestly, I often wonder about how the medical staff and facilities are setup on these ships.

 

Me thinks they worry more about insurance and being sued rather than having a top notch facility that can handle anything for several days to a week.  I think all ship's medical facilities are up for question on just what can they do and what equipment they have.  I feel like they often tell what they CAN'T do rather than what they CAN do given large numbers of people on board.

 

If a child was 14 months and ill, what or how would they handle that child then versus one 11 months old.  I don't see much reason to not refuse any infant over say 10 months.  oh well.  Let the comments flow but really I do question the medical facilities and what do they lack??.  It is a highly technical ship for darn sakes.

Gotta agree on this one. And especially think this is ridiculous as one of those 3 sea days is now being reported as the ship remaining docked in Sydney. 

[BeachChik]

4 hours ago, Oceansaway17 said:

I must say even if an infant or anyone is really ill, isn't two days or one day of some concern as well.  What makes 3rd day so different.

Honestly, I often wonder about how the medical staff and facilities are setup on these ships.

 

Me thinks they worry more about insurance and being sued rather than having a top notch facility that can handle anything for several days to a week.  I think all ship's medical facilities are up for question on just what can they do and what equipment they have.  I feel like they often tell what they CAN'T do rather than what they CAN do given large numbers of people on board.

 

If a child was 14 months and ill, what or how would they handle that child then versus one 11 months old.  I don't see much reason to not refuse any infant over say 10 months.  oh well.  Let the comments flow but really I do question the medical facilities and what do they lack??.  It is a highly technical ship for darn sakes.

Just an assumption but I would guess that the doctors onboard are not pediatricians. So they treat them as they are able until they can get off. They had to draw a line somewhere be it one day, two days etc. Same with the age cutoff. 

[mr walker]

1 minute ago, CoolNickname said:

Gotta agree on this one. And especially think this is ridiculous as one of those 3 sea days is now being reported as the ship remaining docked in Sydney. 

Incorrect! The problem with this cruise re the 3 sea days rule is not the 1 'sea' day in Sydney Harbour today (not docked, but anchored), plus the 2 sea days to Noumea, but the 3 sea days on the return leg from Mystery Island to Sydney at the end of the cruise - original itinerary has 2 sea day Mystery Island to Brisbane & then 1 sea day Brisbane to Sydney. Someone on board posted the revised itinerary they were handed at boarding.

[CoolNickname]

1 minute ago, mr walker said:

Incorrect! The problem with this cruise re the 3 sea days rule is not the 1 'sea' day in Sydney Harbour today (not docked, but anchored), plus the 2 sea days to Noumea, but the 3 sea days on the return leg from Mystery Island to Sydney at the end of the cruise - original itinerary has 2 sea day Mystery Island to Brisbane & then 1 sea day Brisbane to Sydney. Someone on board posted the revised itinerary they were handed at boarding.

thank you for the clarification.

[ReneeFLL]

13 hours ago, chrisb74 said:

 

But the cruise was always going to those places! It changed from 

Sydney -> Noumea -> Mystery -> Brisbane -> Sydney

to 

Sydney -> Noumea -> Mystery -> Sydney. 

 

So they're cruising slower at some point to waste time. At no point will they be further from land than they would have been anyway. 

 

 

Why would they skip Brisbane since it's part of Australia? I think they should have made some exceptions.

Edited February 14, 2020 by ReneeFLL

[chrisb74]

2 minutes ago, mr walker said:

The problem with this cruise re the 3 sea days rule

They may be taking 3 days but they don't need to. The next cruise is doing Mystery Island to Sydney in 2 days. So they could speed up if there was an issue. 

 

I wonder what would happen if the Itinerary changed mid cruise - would they kick the family off at whatever the next port is? The logic is the same. 

 

[chrisb74]

2 minutes ago, ReneeFLL said:

Why would they skip Brisbane since it's part of Australia?

Time. They've lost a day at the start of the cruise due to weather causing them to stay in Sydney. 

 

 

[ReneeFLL]

14 hours ago, Hogbay said:

And if ...if something goes wrong...two thumbs up RCI 👍👍

You were well aware of the policy if not should of .sayin as it is sorry/NOT sorry .

WTH???

[GarlicBread]

3 hours ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Disney is the same.  Makes me wonder if this is a SOLAS or some other regulatory body’s policy that the cruise lines have to adhere to.  That would certainly explain why they don’t vary from it.  

 

Not SOLAS or any other 'rule'. 

MSC will allow any age to cruise on their ships.

[Billy Baltic]

24 minutes ago, twangster said:

 

Mid cruise such a change leaves no alternative but to proceed.  If someone is sick on boarding day they will block them from boarding.  If someone becomes sick mid cruise they don't kick them off.  

 

Part of the issue is the geography and distance from Sydney to any ports of call.  Especially when one port of the few in the area closes to cruise ships.  

 

I thought about staying on for the next cruise but talking with some crew it became an unattractive itinerary with a port lost when the port banned cruise ships.  A few days later weather became a factor further impacting the itinerary.  

 

We don't see this often in the US or Med because there are many alternative ports. 

 

 

Infants mature at different rates.  Despite that they have to create a standard to follow and create policy.  Many books on infant development break it down to months of age.  It's not perfect but used universally for many things related to infant care. Developmentally there is a huge difference between an 11 and 13 month old.  Just ask any parent.  

I have 3 children so need to ask a parent. Development also happens at different rates. One child at 11 months is further on than another at 13months. I understand they have to draw a line but it’s incredibly crude. 
 

[twangster]

17 minutes ago, Billy Baltic said:

 I understand they have to draw a line but it’s incredibly crude. 

Probably safer to ban them until 2 yo but I guess they are trying to be accommodating. 

[A&L_Ont]

4 hours ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Disney is the same.  Makes me wonder if this is a SOLAS or some other regulatory body’s policy that the cruise lines have to adhere to.  That would certainly explain why they don’t vary from it.  

 

30 minutes ago, GarlicBread said:

 

Not SOLAS or any other 'rule'. 

MSC will allow any age to cruise on their ships.

@chengkp75 can you explain if there is a standard minimum age limit set by the cruise lines unilaterally or by someone else?  
 

The 3 day at sea limit has been discussed for 12 months of age, but for under 6 months seems to be standards to different cruise lines. 

[The_Big_M]

15 hours ago, Biker19 said:

Not much out there between Sydney and Vanuatu/Mystery Island. Nothing like Florida and Bahamas.

Actually, there's a whole coast line and any destination would be a maximum of a day away. Either capital of Noumea or Brisbane would be at most 1 day away.

[The_Big_M]

1 hour ago, twangster said:

 

Part of the issue is the geography and distance from Sydney to any ports of call.  Especially when one port of the few in the area closes to cruise ships.  

 

I thought about staying on for the next cruise but talking with some crew it became an unattractive itinerary with a port lost when the port banned cruise ships.  A few days later weather became a factor further impacting the itinerary.  

 

We don't see this often in the US or Med because there are many alternative ports. 

 

 

There are actually multiple ports in the vicinity for alternatives. Along that route, there are Noumea, Brisbane and Newcastle on the way, just as those with docking facilities, plus even more ports where tendering is possible.

 

Lack of ports, or remoteness, are not issues.

[Biker19]

14 minutes ago, The_Big_M said:

Actually, there's a whole coast line and any destination would be a maximum of a day away. Either capital of Noumea or Brisbane would be at most 1 day away.

Port Everglades to Nassau is 190 miles, Sydney to Vanuatu is 1600 + miles.