Sick Child-Familythrown off ship (merged)

[hawkshoe]

This is exactly why we got passports and purchased trip insurance.

 

While I do feel bad for this family and what they went through, much of it could have been avoided had they planned properly. It is likely that the ships Dr. thought that the childs life could be at risk by allowing them to stay on the ship. The ships infirmery has limited ability to care for sick patrons. If they had allowed this family to stay and the child had died as a result, this would have been a much worse story.

[Silvery Seas Cruiser]

Because of my husband's work at the time, I've been in Third World hospitals and know how bad they can be. I suffered throughout those years from severe asthma atacks and had no recourse. In one "better" hospital, I needed to go to the bathroom. I was directed to a broom closet. In it was a toilet and a wash tub with some filthy blood-covered mops soaking in bloody water. If I had not been so darned sick, I would have run out of that place as fast as my legs could carry me.

 

Anyway, here's my point. If you are traveling to Third World countries, you do, indeed, take a risk that if anything whatsoever should befall you , be it illness or an injury, you are at the mercy of the health system in whatever country you are in at the time.

 

If you find that such a risk is unacceptable, do not travel to Third World countries on a cruise or otherwise, even with travel insurance.

 

Finally, never travel abroad without a passport and travel insurance...most especially if you will be traveling to Third World countries because they do not have the infrastructure to conveniently assist you in an emergency. They conduct business at their pace, not yours. They mean well, but they have a different style than many of us are accustomed to. Just be cautious and prudent when traveling abroad. It is better to be prepared.

[kingsgirl]

I'm really sorry that the outcome was so bothersome to you. Obviously, no one likes to see anyone put in that type of situation.

 

Unfortunately, it is our own responsibility to carry passports and get trip insurance. We run the risk of paying extra for mishaps if we don't.

 

RCI didn't have to offer a deal on another cruise but they did. Be happy that the family got that, if nothing else.

[crusinmama06]

Wow I didn't get another cruise from Disney when we were medevacced off the ship. Now I feel ripped off. :eek: And Carnival did the same thing. And now RCCL. So you are running out of cruiselines.:rolleyes:

 

BTW, I AM the media. Worked in broadcast news for 7 years. Hate to be the one to tell you this but DON'T believe the things you see on TV. :rolleyes: It's called ratings. TV news relies on ADVERTISERS to fund their budgets. If they don't have interesting stories, then no one watches, then they don't get their budgets for the year. So if it bleeds, it leads.

 

I see this story and think (whoa good for sweeps week). You look at it and change the cruiseline you sail with? :rolleyes: Some people are just really gullable.

[Esmerelda]

The ship made the right medical decision. A child that age can go downhill VERY fast. Ships are not medically able to support that possible outcome.

 

If it were my 9month old in this shape...I would be glad to get off the ship to find a medical facility.

 

Once again...never cruise without insurance..and for goodness sakes....get passports for everyone traveling on a ship!!

 

I have no problem with RCCL decision on this one...I actually commend them. This baby could have died.

 

 

Esmerelda <healthcare worker for over 20 years

[Arizona Laura]

You know folks I am not sure if all removals from ships these days are really all valid!! I had this happen to one of my passenger in early 2006 and basically all the ships dr wanted was this passenger off his ship no matter what! Our pax had developed thombosis and was to be left on the Dominican. I saw that hospital and believe me it is a third world hospital - the ships hospital was so much better than that. Due to the thrombosis we would not even have beeen able to medivac this passenger to the next island which was not third world. The thing was that after the passenger got his blood thininng meds he was fine and got to enjoy the rest of his cruise but had the Dr. had his way and had I not had a word or 2 with the Capt. while showing him the photos I took of the hospital my pax would have been left there.

 

Just a few things - the room in which he saw the dr had a moaning patient lying in one corner and another being rolled in who promptly threw up at the feet of my passenger. He had to waited for his doppler scan in a room where the ceiling was half hanging down and as we left the room the rest of the ceiling came crashing down. To top it at the scan the person adminersterin the scan B**ed bacause I insisted the goooey scanner head be disinfected before being used on my pax. The next and last thing was the pax who weighs about 100 Kg at over 1,80m height was tould to roll over and had I not been there holding his hand he would have cracked his head on a counter when the bed he was on colapsed under him...... You bet he was not going to be staying in this hospital one mintue longer!!!

 

Bascially all ships Dr. want you off their ship no matter what these days since they are the one liable and nothing else. They will however tell you they want you in specialist care!

 

The infirmary on the ship is not a "hospital". The dr knew this gentleman needed to have testing done to assess for blood clots. Blood clots can travel to the lungs and that is an extremely serious condition.

You know that if the gentleman was not sent to the hospital and had a bad outcome the dr would have been liable. It can be a no win situation for the dr in situations like these.

We do take a risk when we travel with the available medical facilities at each port. They can be very substandard. RCCL has no control over the conditions of these hospitals and what type of medical care is provided there. Obviously the passenger was able to get his scan done even though the condition of the hospital itself sounds pretty deplorable.

Your passenger is lucky the Capt intervened and he was not forced to remain on the island until he was judged medically safe to fly. The hospital obviously did not admit this patient for IV Heparin so he would not have been forced to stay in the hospital if he was unable to reboard the ship. The passenger even though on anticoags with a blood clot still is at risk.

I dare to say the dr had to agree to allow this passenger to stay on board no matter what the Capt felt.

Laura

[canucks4]

Bets it will be a lead story on Nancy Grace!!!;)

[denb]

The excuse is you don't need one.

Unless you have to leave the ship and return to the U.S. by air. Quite a gamble (especially with a baby), and that's exactly what happened in this case. They lost!

[denb]

We just returned from a cruise last week. As soon as we got in line for embarkation (in FLL), we were given a 1 page form to fill out. It asked (basically) if we had any gastrointestinal problems currently or in the last few days. There were 4 or 5 yes/no questions. Everyone was required to fill it out and sign it prior to boarding. I'm assuming if you lied on this form (brought sickness onboard) it would give the cruise line a much better defense in booting you off the ship or in rejecting claims that the person aquired it onboard.

 

I heard this story on the news this morning with the added statement that the baby had the symptoms for a few days prior to boarding. I'm not saying I believe everything I hear on the news, but if that's true and they also signed the same form we did, then ..................:confused:

[Happy ks]

The excuse is you don't need one.

 

 

Until you read a story like this one and come to realize it's not just a worthless document that many people claim it is. I cannot tell you how many times I've read families moan about the cost of passports here on the boards, they can't afford the extra.

 

No insurance, no passports....bad decision. The news stories that are so sympathetic to people like this never tell the whole truth, just the part that makes it more interesting news. Irresponsibility should not be rewarded like they want it to be, it would be a better lesson to the public if they stated the family could have avoided all these costs and frustrations with insurance and passports.

 

I'm glad the baby is well, but I hardly think the doctor put them off for a simple cold. Diarrhea and vomiting are not cold symtoms, perhaps the D and V had subsided by the time they finally got care at the hospital. Not to mention if the illness was a noro-virus, it could have infected many of the other pax.

 

So, even though the OP has not returned, the argument is not, nor will ever be, on the side of the irresponsible.

[Goldryder]

Something has occurred to me about this 'story'.

 

The fact that the family had no passports/insurance was their own fault...but they didn't want to actually admit that the extra expenses were their fault. So it sounds like a case of 'we stuffed up big time...but lets make ourselves look like the victims and push the blame onto RCI instead'

 

Does anyone else get that same feeling from all this...or am I just too cynical?

[wrp96]

Something has occurred to me about this 'story'.

 

The fact that the family had no passports/insurance was their own fault...but they didn't want to actually admit that the extra expenses were their fault. So it sounds like a case of 'we stuffed up big time...but lets make ourselves look like the victims and push the blame onto RCI instead'

 

Does anyone else get that same feeling from all this...or am I just too cynical?

 

I'd guess about 99% of us here on CC agree with you.

[nrdsb4]

Molly, my child, too, would regurgitate a large quantity of just-consumed milk, and then go on nursing like nothing was wrong. That's not vomiting.

 

These people SAID, on the tape (did you watch it or just read the story?), that she was vomiting and HAD DIARRHEA. Did your son ALWAYS start ANY illness with vomiting and diarrhea?

 

What the Cortes family is saying is definitely NOT what you are describing.

 

They are also quoted as saying that they thought that little Zoie was SEASICK. I am sorry - diarrhea is NOT a symptom of seasickness!

 

 

It's not clear in the story who the five people were, but in the TV news video, there are two boys sitting in the room with the parents and Zoie.

 

Molly, have you read all of the posts, or did you read the story and then just skim? The ship was leaving Nassau. The next stop is CocoCay. There are NO medical facilities there. It would have been a NIGHTMARE if the child had seized, or become dehydrated, or any other negative development.

 

It is all well and good to say that $600 is nothing and proves that they didn't do anything for the baby. It doesn't prove that her presenting symptoms weren't alarming and that the best thing to do was to let them sail and hope for the best.

 

Also, look at the obvious exaggerations. We are specifically told what it cost them: $455 for emergency passports, $650 for airfare, $584 for the hospital bill. That's NOT what the interviewer says. She says, "And it cost them thousands of dollars to get home."

 

To me, that speaks volumes about the accuracy of the entire report.

 

Good to see you back on the boards, though! :)

 

Not to mention that seasickness is VERY RARE in children under two.

[crusinmama06]

Someone asked me on another thread about what our insurance covered so I might as well post it here....

 

Yes we had insurance, but it took me 3 YEARS to claim it and having some really great CCers encourage me to go for it.

 

What happened was that at the time, the Travel Insurance company said I needed a letter written BY the doctor saying he would not allow us to travel. At PC Medical Center, they said the doctors can't write letters because then they would spend "all of their time writing letters and not treating patients"

 

So I mentioned something on here about it on CC. And everyone encouraged me to go after them again. I got Disney involved and I got the insurance to pay portions of the medical expenses back.

 

My TA (at the time) didn't link my airfare with the cruise insurance :rolleyes: . I ended up being out $1,250 for the 5 extra tickets we had to purchase to get home. After the cruise, she said she didn't add my airfafre to the insurance because it would have been "too expensive" :rolleyes: Yeah, with a $10,000 back to back, I wasn't exactly being economical. That was the last time I used THAT TA.

 

Maybe I should have gone to the news media and blamed Disney cruiselines....LOL! :p

[TPKeller]

It is very unfortunate that this thread about a medical evacuation issue has branched into another Passport thread.

 

Most of the posts on this thread concerning the requirement of presenting a passport to return to the United States by air, in the case of an unforeseen emergency, are simply wrong.

 

If you wish to know more about the actual rules for this situation, please read through this thread, which has much discussion of the matter, as well as links to the direct source documents from the DHS:

 

Process for flying home early without a Passport?

 

I am in the process of chasing down the answers that we have not yet been able to find concerning this very subject. I am making very good progress, but I am not quite ready to publish my findings. If you follow my posts at all, you know that I am thorough, and that is the case here, I expect to soon have a complete answer. Stay tuned.

 

Theron

[Moeve]

The infirmary on the ship is not a "hospital". The dr knew this gentleman needed to have testing done to assess for blood clots. Blood clots can travel to the lungs and that is an extremely serious condition.

You know that if the gentleman was not sent to the hospital and had a bad outcome the dr would have been liable. It can be a no win situation for the dr in situations like these.

We do take a risk when we travel with the available medical facilities at each port. They can be very substandard. RCCL has no control over the conditions of these hospitals and what type of medical care is provided there. Obviously the passenger was able to get his scan done even though the condition of the hospital itself sounds pretty deplorable.

Your passenger is lucky the Capt intervened and he was not forced to remain on the island until he was judged medically safe to fly. The hospital obviously did not admit this patient for IV Heparin so he would not have been forced to stay in the hospital if he was unable to reboard the ship. The passenger even though on anticoags with a blood clot still is at risk.

I dare to say the dr had to agree to allow this passenger to stay on board no matter what the Capt felt.

Laura

 

Laura the joke was the meds were administered ONBOARD by the ships Doctor BEFORE making him go to the hospital for the doppler scan they couldn't do onboard. Which in this case was fine but LEAVING the patient at THIS hospital when the onboard facilities were handle this case would have been an absolutey inexcusable. Believe me had X done this the passenger would have suited the pants off X.

[Moeve]

Hallo Theron - I have been waiting for you!!!! This is exactly the case we have been talking about for weeks now.

 

Surely this example should get the lawmakers thinking - this exception for passports is not working in reality!! So why not amend it and do away with this pitfall?

[pcur]

And you believe the crap on tv? How foolish. When I was a teen I was sort of hurt on a train, but not really. There were teens getting on a crowded train ( on our way home from HS) there was some pushing and shoving and a some poeple got mildy hurt. I had a small bruise on my face, form banging into a pole. Well the press turned it into a race war. It was so blown out of proportion we did not answer our phone for days. The media exaggerates everything. Otherwise there is no news:eek: .

 

And as I said in the other thread I believe the parents were negligent in not noticig the baby's symptoms. When my children were small I coud tell days before they came down with something that they were getting sick, they should never have brought the child on the ship and without insurance, come on.:rolleyes:

 

ABSOLUTELY!! I started getting suspicious when I read the article and got to the part about no passports. I figured they weren't the sharpest tacks in the box, or had INARGUABLY bad planning skills, to not have a bottle of Peidialyte or anti-nausea meds with them on a cruise ship with an infant, for pity's sake!! (Maybe they did, but the article didn't say anything about that. Methinks the journalist wanted to get a "good" story under his/her name.) Then, we got to the combination of no passport, no travel insurance, and crying to STAY ON THE SHIP when the doctor advised them to GO TO A HOSPITAL!!! I then suspected, and continued to suspect, there was a language barrier, or a not-so-smart barrier, along with the poor-planning barrier with the parents!!!

[Sea and Me]

I can't believe that a cruise line would "throw off a baby". Throw isn't the word that should be used!! I hope the baby is doing well by now.

 

On our first couple of cruises we opted no insurance. However as situations changed at home we started to take it. Thank heaven because we used it twice. On our cruise to Hawaii we needed to get different flight arrangements due to a passenger with a medical emergency onboard. My personal use was due to using the medical center.

 

Young or old you never know what can happen. A cruise ship is like a city with a lot going on. When in port who knows what can happen. Like the saying goes "An ounce of pervention" !!

 

Just my opinion.

 

Carol

[TPKeller]

I then suspected, and continued to suspect, ... there was a not-so-smart barrier...

Priceless! I'll have to remember that one. That can be the biggest barrier of them all...

 

Theron

[Ocean Boy]

As far as leaving the ship with a sick baby- well that would be ok for me (let the rest of the family cruise on) I would however only accept this if I were certain that the medical fasilities on the island were not worse than those onboard. Now THIS little technicallity is certainly not a given fact on many Islands in the carribbean.

 

I believe the decision is up to the physician as to whether or not the issue can be addressed aboard ship not wether or not you agree to leave the ship due to your perceiption of the facilities.

[Ocean Boy]

Laura the joke was the meds were administered ONBOARD by the ships Doctor BEFORE making him go to the hospital for the doppler scan they couldn't do onboard. Which in this case was fine but LEAVING the patient at THIS hospital when the onboard facilities were handle this case would have been an absolutey inexcusable. Believe me had X done this the passenger would have suited the pants off X.

 

And if the patient had later died from a pulmonary embolism aboard ship the family would have sued the pants off of the cruise line and everyone in sight.

[jbrambach]

I think I remember this lady (by her picture). Not to long ago she was pleading with people to support Carnival out of New Orleans. She wanted people to not believe all of the "bad" things they heard. (Can't remember now if she was siting New Orleans or Carnival). But for someone who wanted people to "see for themselves" she sure is taking a firm stance w/o knowing both sides on this story:rolleyes: . JMHO.

[Barbee524]

Hmm, the Majesty departs Nassau at 6:00 pm, was the child so sick that they turned around and returned to port? Yes, they will do this in cases of extreme illness.

[PH8]

Hmm, the Majesty departs Nassau at 6:00 pm, was the child so sick that they turned around and returned to port? Yes, they will do this in cases of extreme illness.

I am pretty sure the MJ use to leave around midnight on its 4 nt cruise.......just recently changed to 6pm,so perhaps they were supposed to be there late...