Are our cruising days over? (merged topics re: health and age restrictions)

[susancruzs]

I'll be 73 in July, planning on my Sky Grand Adventure 26 days, Aug. 24th.  If I have to bring a health form, I  will.  I have no health issues, take no medications, should take a vitamin, I don't.  Someone posted there is a sign by the elevator, Sky plans to cruise from Copenhagen in May.  Barring unforeseen future issues, I will be in Copenhagen in August.

 

Regularly on a senior bus trip, I'm asked to fill out a form, name, etc., phone number, my sisters number, insurance, say, here you go.  They say, you have to fill this out.  I say, I did.  No issues and they are rather surprised.

[dog]

8 hours ago, TYinPalmSprings said:

Yes, It's purely discrimination. Back in 2009 when the H1N1 (Swine Flu) invaded the industry, we got rerouted a lot and there was some confusion, but I do not recall them making any similar requirement to the age group that was target for the illness: children and those under 25.  You have paid for the cruise, and now, after the fact, they change the policy, and keep your money. No one is fighting for us right now, unfortunately. 

Agtree completely with everything you are saying 

[dog]

8 hours ago, pully8 said:

Ageism is perhaps the last discrimination to be recognised and dealt with in the same way racism pervades the world.

Sadly many do not consider their policies/practices to be discriminatory.

Time for that to change in all aspects of life including travel.

Not all older people fit the stereotype of frail or vulnerable.

Many may be fitter than people half their age. 

Yes, agree!

[franktown]

I posted earlier on what my Cardiologist neighbor said about signing the form.  He just informed me that he doubts his insurance company or any Doctors insurance company would allow him to sign the form on a disease that so little is known even with a full battery of tests.

[dog]

35 minutes ago, franktown said:

Just talked to my neighbor who is a Cardiologist.  He said he would not sign for any patient under his care without complete testing which would run many thousands of dollars.  Said there is no way to know how a individual would react to the virus including those under 70.  He said and I quote " they are just trying to cover their butt"

Yes. Agree 

[mevs904]

Well, we’ve just made the decision to pull the plug on our March 2021 South America/ Antarctica cruise.  Under the current situation we would not feel comfortable on a 31 day cruise, even if a vaccine was developed and tested by then (which seems doubtful).  We were looking forward to the itinerary as well as one more cruise on our beloved Coral and our first cruise in a mini-suite.  Well, it was fun while it lasted.  We will miss being at sea and those lovely walks on the full promenade deck.

[Sea Hag]

I'm a very unhappy camper about this for two reasons.

 

First off, it would have been really nice (and good business practice as well) if Princess had rolled this out before I, and many others, took Option 1 on the cancellations. I took Option 1, and even though DH and I don't have any serious medical conditions, it's looking likely that we're out the entire cruise money. If they'd told us that then, I would have taken Option 2.

 

Which brings me to reason two that I'm unhappy about. I can't see how our doctor would ever sign such as thing. Nothing much wrong with us, barring arthritis and allergies, but that form looks to me like it's forcing the doctor to assume liability if we go on a cruise and come to grief medically. In our law-suit-happy society, why would a doctor do that?

 

I've been solidly behind Princess throughout all this mess, but to pull this after the fact on a lot of people is too much.

[Mackenzie1]

1 hour ago, franktown said:

Just talked to my neighbor who is a Cardiologist.  He said he would not sign for any patient under his care without complete testing which would run many thousands of dollars.  Said there is no way to know how a individual would react to the virus including those under 70.  He said and I quote " they are just trying to cover their butt"

That’s one concern I had. Doctors may not want to sign the form because of the potential liability should someone have a health incident while cruising. 

[nini]

1 hour ago, franktown said:

I posted earlier on what my Cardiologist neighbor said about signing the form.  He just informed me that he doubts his insurance company or any Doctors insurance company would allow him to sign the form on a disease that so little is known even with a full battery of tests.

Thank you for relaying this information. I do not think that the under 70 crowd really

does not yet understand the potential impact. AND, I know that several cruise lines understand either:

 

Family cruises on Disney will come to a halt! All of those over 70 Baby Boomers will not be

hosting any family cruises, so much for Viking Ocean... need I continue with the ramifications?

 

When I see my Doctor next time, I will ask him as well about signing this form.

 

Oh, but wait! This form can and will change at anytime; it will have set a precedence.

Our final payment is in June for a much anticipated cruise.

[bobwendy05]

My concern is if this is constitutionally sound and not a gross example of discrimination. All age groups have people with chronic illnesses. If you have any of those listed conditions what doctor in their right minds would sign it. This is basically a ban on ALL passengers 70 and over.

[Justalone]

7 hours ago, fireman999 said:

We are in a similar position it the UK as our government has just issued a statement indicating that people over 70 with chronic health conditions such as diabetes should no go on a cruise holiday. My wife and I both have diabetes and my wife has other health problems and we are due to sail on the QE on the 12th April 2020 on a Circumnavigation Cruise of Australia.

Obviously, we have contacted both our cruise agent by email 4 times with no response except to send us the tickets, together with Cunard who have responded indicting that they are reviewing the situation. Some insurers in the UK are stating that travel insurance is for unexpected events and coronavirus is a known event so they are not liable and if you travel against government advice you may not be covered.

This obviously puts us in am impossible situation and makes think we will never cruise again.

If no cruise line or government restrictions in the UK for a Fit to Travel certification is required, then go on the cruise.   What is the worse thing that could happen to you? Especially if you accept liability if , God forbid, something does happen to you or  your wife on the cruise.

Carry more medication that you need just in case you are quarantined.  At least 28 days worth?

Enjoy your cruise and safe travels.

[Sea Hag]

Right after I posted my rant above, I got a canned email from Jan Swartz, thanking me so much for being a loyal customer. She says that she has only one request of me: "Stick with us."  Hmmm. Who's doing to unsticking here? Is it me, or is it Princess? Wait and see what happens, I suppose.

[bobwendy05]

4 hours ago, MadManOfBethesda said:

 

No, it's not.  You need to look up the definition of discrimination.

 

If they banned all 70+ year olds, without regard to any other characteristic or qualification, that would be discrimination.  Simply asking for medical certification that people over 70 are healthy, is not.

 

Plain and simple.

The fact they are SINGLING out, ONLY,  people over 70 with chronic conditions DOES constitute discrimination. IT IS THE DEFINITION of discrimination. ONE GROUP singled out.

[dog]

44 minutes ago, bobwendy05 said:

My concern is if this is constitutionally sound and not a gross example of discrimination. All age groups have people with chronic illnesses. If you have any of those listed conditions what doctor in their right minds would sign it. This is basically a ban on ALL passengers 70 and over.

True agree 

[Adventures ahead]

I think that the form from RCI is ill-conceived. I don't believe that any doctor can predict susceptibility to COVD19 with 100% accuracy for someone of any age because not enough is yet known about the virus.  People under 70 are dying.

 

If the cruise lines want a health form regarding chronic conditions, then every passenger should submit one, and one that's not tied to COVID19, much the same as insurance companies have exclusions for pre-existing conditions that aren't stable. In my opinion, a 40-yr-old with COPD may be at a greater risk for a medical emergency, especially in these coronavirus days but not limited to, than a 70-yr-old with high blood pressure that is controlled by medication, monitored on a regular basis and stable for a long on-going basis. OP, this would describe my DH, and I certainly hope that our cruising days are not over. We'll see if Princess produces a form or if a doctor can write a letter that speaks to chronic unstable conditions.

 

Edited March 14, 2020 by Adventures ahead

[LaineyParker]

This also means that we will not be able to take our kids and their families
on a cruise. This is very upsetting.

I suspect this requirement was agreed upon by the cruise industry in conjunction with government agencies to reduce contact for those with health issues. Also it does leaves the decision to the health provider who I am sure will take the health and welfare of their patients seriously. Likewise, this measure is likely to be temporary like all the other conditions being imposed across the US.


Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[caribill]

6 hours ago, dog said:

Could someone direct me to the place where Princess cruises states this?  
on Mach 6 th I took the cancel for 100 percent FCC.  No mention of doctor’s note, age etc was mentioned to me by my TA in order to use it. If so, then I expect a cash refund 

 

Princess has not started this yet, but the CLIA proposed it (Princess is a member) and a number of other cruise lines have already implemented it, from Carnival to Royal Caribbean to NCL.

 

With Princess cruises suspended for 60 days, there is no rush to put that requirement into effect.

 

Carnival news about this (before they announced suspending cruises):

https://kfor.com/health/coronavirus/carnival-cruise-passengers-say-they-were-denied-boarding-due-to-existing-health-conditions/

 

And sample forms:

 

https://www.ncl.com/sites/default/files/Certificate-of-Medical-Fitness-to-Travel-form.pdf 

 

https://www.royalcaribbean.com/content/dam/royal/resources/pdf/rccl-approved-physician-letter.pdf 

 

 

[caribill]

One advantage of the Princess 60 day suspension of cruises vs the other companies doing it for only 30 days is that we can monitor posts on the other cruise line's forums to see if people have problems getting these certificates signed.

[Renmar]

44 minutes ago, bobwendy05 said:

The fact they are SINGLING out, ONLY,  people over 70 with chronic conditions DOES constitute discrimination. IT IS THE DEFINITION of discrimination. ONE GROUP singled out.

If that is the definition than there is a lot of age discrimination;

Driving age:16

Drinking age: 19/21

Cruising:1 person has to be 21 

President of US: has to be 35 or older

etc. etc.

See this insurance note;

 

Theo

[Cruise Raider]

4 hours ago, Sea Hag said:

I've been solidly behind Princess throughout all this mess, but to pull this after the fact on a lot of people is too much.

 

Yes, whomever it was at CLIA had proposed this was obviously not looking at the serious consequences of introducing such a ludicrous policy.  

I, too, think Princess has handled every situation they've been thrown into with as much grace as could possibly have been mustered ... and I don't think Princess is pulling this as much as CLIA .... but it will cause industry death if not reconsidered.  

I know this decision was made out of a mindset of desperation, but they are digging a bigger hole.  

We haven't put in for our choice of option 1 or option 2 yet, but I think you just clinched it for me.  Neither of us are in poor health or over 70 yet .... but, I don't think this policy will bode well for the cruise lines.  

Edited March 14, 2020 by Cruise Raider

[StillPooh]

5 hours ago, franktown said:

Just talked to my neighbor who is a Cardiologist.  He said he would not sign for any patient under his care without complete testing which would run many thousands of dollars.  Said there is no way to know how a individual would react to the virus including those under 70.  He said and I quote " they are just trying to cover their butt"

The cruise lines want to shift liability, and no physician in their right mind would willingly take on the risk. 
 

But if passengers were to do a bit of creative writing, would there really be time at boarding for desk clerks to verify letters? 😉

[WmFCoyote]

13 minutes ago, StillPooh said:

The cruise lines want to shift liability, and no physician in their right mind would willingly take on the risk. 
 

But if passengers were to do a bit of creative writing, would there really be time at boarding for desk clerks to verify letters? 😉

Just a guess on my part but PCL will probably want the doctors letter in their hands at least 5 days prior to boarding. If they are unable to verify information the passenger will be denied boarding. They will put the blame / responsibility onto the customer. In other words "If you do not provide verifiable information within our guide lines you will be denied boarding without compensation".

[Sea Hag]

18 minutes ago, StillPooh said:

The cruise lines want to shift liability, and no physician in their right mind would willingly take on the risk. 
 

But if passengers were to do a bit of creative writing, would there really be time at boarding for desk clerks to verify letters? 😉

Not a chance I'm likely to take. I think you'd need to use a valid doctor registry number, and that should be quick and easy for them to check. At least that's how I'd think they would do it. So, the doctor name would need to match that registration. People might get away with this in droves, but it seems to me that they'd be leaving themselves open to possible charges of some kind or another. Forgery? Not a lawyer here.

[Sea Hag]

2 minutes ago, WmFCoyote said:

Just a guess on my part but PCL will probably want the doctors letter in their hands at least 5 days prior to boarding. If they are unable to verify information the passenger will be denied boarding. They will put the blame / responsibility onto the customer. In other words "If you do not provide verifiable information within our guide lines you will be denied boarding without compensation".

Your answer is much better than mine. I think you nailed it.

[satxdiver]

Appears as though the cruise lines have now eliminated a large part of their base.  I hope they are prepared to have a lot of extra capacity that will be sailing empty meaning of course lost revenue.  We who are over 70 will gladly take our money and use it for travel in other areas.  

 

As for turning pax away at the terminal, I predict that a lot of lawyers are about to get a lot of business.