Royal Caribbean kicked me off cruise ship for having a migraine

[Lars2014]

Not sure if OP had cancel for any reason or not. She admits 20 year history and taking meds for it, would insurance cover since it's pre-existing?

[jonbgd]

To the OP sorry to hear this happened to you

 

To everyone else that is being critical

Have you ever experienced a migraine

Or have you ever worked the ER when a Pt presented themsevles with these complaints???????

 

SO Pt presents signs of migraine with Hx of

 

Onboard Md orders Imitrex for Pt than turfs the Pt to stateside ER:confused:

Usually when giving a Pt Imitrex you let them relax in a dark room.

 

While I don't think the Onboard Dx may have been correct

I think Onboard MD didn't want to take responsibility of the Pt in case something else was going on.

Edited February 8, 2014 by jonbgd

[jonbgd]

Travel insurance is not always cut and dried, nor is it easy to collect. When we cancelled due to my cancer last year, we had to provide my physician's signatures on forms as well as her account of what happened and what exact date I became unable to travel, and we had to file within 24 hours of my becoming incapacitated - plus of course they phoned my physician after that to make sure everything was accurate and truthful. I think anyone would agree they are looking for a loop hole - a reason not to pay out. Praise God we got everything back but it did take some time.

 

Im sorry to hear this. Good luck with your recovery. I know it isn't easy

With My GF and her Ca it is pre-existing and insurance wont cover it:(

[lazeyey]

That sucks!

[mollyeilis]

I haven't read every post but for the OP - how did the staff member come to notice you at Muster?

 

She was sitting outside the muster area and refused to go inside, saying she couldn't go in there, she thought she was getting a migraine, and could the person get her some water.

 

In the original post she said only...

 

When I'm coming down with a migraine, I slur and stammer. This is a common-enough symptom that it has a name, dysphasic aura.

 

The medic insisted that I might be having a stroke, and wouldn't listen to me or DH telling them that this was the same set of symptoms that I have with EVERY migraine...

 

But later explained what I just stated. In other words, she wasn't following the instructions of the people onboard that we MUST listen to. I'm not surprised she was sent off.

 

 

As disappointing as it is, RCCL did the cautious, prudent thing.

 

I used to suffer migraines and took Imitrex for them. I woke up with a migraine one morning a few years ago. Same symptoms as I always had with migraines - including aura. Took my meds and soldiered on to work. Where I promptly had a stroke. At age 40.

 

I've never looked at migraines the same since that moment. I don't want to think about what would have happened had I "soldiered on" and gotten onto a cruise ship with my "normal migraine" that morning... :eek:

 

 

That's what I kept thinking. You think it's a migraine, and it is a migraine, until one day, maybe, it isn't a migraine. And then you HOPE you're around people who don't just take your word for it.

 

My MIL didn't have a stroke until, you know, she had a stroke. And then she had 6 more inside of 2 months.

 

Every time she got to the hospital it took HOURS for the doctors to see her. By the time the doctors saw her (and we brought her in so fast because they told us "time is brain") her symptoms were GONE. Thankfully they believed our telling of the events and got scans so they could SEE the damage that was being done.

 

I'm pretty freaked about an ER doctor taking 20 minutes to determine things... Shouldn't be, though, because I've encountered some awful ER and non-ER doctors!

 

One of the ER doctors that saw MIL saw her come in TOTALLY out of it, not speaking English or even Korean (her birth language, and the one she held onto in 5 of the 7 strokes even while she temporarily lost English), just nearly gone. And the doctor chose to give her Ativan *without telling anyone*. For what reason? No one knows. Sure did knock her out though. That same doctor told DH to gather the family to say their goodbyes. 3 hours later we had all the sibs there. Many many tears. And suddenly she started coming up from it. A miracle! A nurse walked by, noticed this, and said "Oh good, the Ativan is wearing off." Shock. Amazement. The Ativan wasn't in the notes; no one but that ER physician (who had gone off shift and left almost immediately after dosing MIL) and that nurse knew.

 

 

 

 

As for the "you shouldn't give dietary advice to someone who has dealt with migraines for x years" comment....my husband dealt with migraines from 3 years old to 30. At 28 years old he met me, a former chiropractor, and for the first time ever learned that chiropractic can help with migraines. I started adjusting him, and after regular, gentle, chiropractic care, his migraines started slowing down. At this point he hasn't had one in something like 8 years. Had them 25 years, and no one had EVER told him that there might be something to be done about it.

 

 

Also, after having watched him experience those migraines...coming out in the middle of the night to find him in the fetal position on the floor was a "fabulous" moment...the concept of migraines being a "mild" condition makes me sick. It's NOT mild.

 

 

And being someone prone to migraines doesn't make you immune to strokes. Period.

 

 

The imitrex dosing might be something worth discussing, but that's assuming that doctors know even 2 big things about ANY drug they prescribe. That's the pharmacist's area of knowledge. I'm always shocked when a doctor knows the issues with a medication they are prescribing. And it's almost NEVER happened in my own experience.

[Coralc]

This person apparently had a similar experience on another cruise line with gout.

 

 

"I can confirm from harsh personal experience that cruise lines don’t think they have to do anything to make it up to customers when things go awry and it’s their fault. The contract of carriage is, in fact, totally one sided, with no recourse or appeal on the part of the passenger. Caveat emptor. Buy trip insurance.

 

I had booked a cruise from Istanbul to Venice last summer aboard Oceania’s Riviera. I reported aboard with a very large knee, caused by my worst gout attack ever, complicated by an infection from a fall. I called my physician at home, who is on staff at Presbyterian-New York Weill Cornell Medical Center, and she suggested I not get treated until I got aboard ship and saw the ship’s doctor. The doctor, whom I judged in the end to be incompetent, wanted me immediately debarked before the ship sailed, so I could “have (my) knee opened and scraped.” I declined. He was in a panic about my high white cell count, not realizing that gout increases white cell count as surely as an infection, and for the same reason. So he treated me for the infection, and only upon my insistence treated me for the gout. He kept referring to me as “septic” and being in danger of losing my knee unless I immediately had it opened and scraped. He never believed I had gout, however, refused to talk to my doctor back home, saying “I don’t care what she thinks and I especially don’t care what you think,” and when he involuntarily debarked me into the Greek medical system three days later he noted on my medical certificate (from memory, but this is the gist) “Patient thinks he has gout. Uric acid level normal.” In other words, he was claiming I didn’t know what I was talking about.

"

 

The link is here...bottom of page: http://blog.insuremytrip.com/2013/02/15/travel-insurance-cruise-disasters-carnival-triumph.html

 

The cruise ship physician that I saw onboard in December (for shingles) wanted to put me off for onshore medical. I sort of refused, because I would have been in just as much pain onshore as onboard. :o No reason to ruin the cruise for my husband and friends. He just wrote "patient refused onshore medical treatment" on my chart. It ruined MY cruise, it was a painful, but not a generally life threatening condition. :D I won't get the lost 4 days back, but either primary or travel insurance will reimburse for the medical visit.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Coralc

[belmontcrew]

the OP has travel insurance. there is no need for Royal to refund anything esp since the fine print on the contracts states that you can be put off with no refund at any point.

 

what's to prevent the OP for getting a refund from Royal then turning around and putting in a claim with their travel insurance thus double dipping?

 

Yes they can kick you off without a refund. That still does not change that under these circumstances, the right thing to do would have been to offer a refund.

 

As to the double dipping, do you believe the insurance company would just pay the OP without any verification of the events (refund from RCI)? Any double dipping would be highly unlikely.

[The_Big_M]

I know it's totally hypothetical, but if it happened 7-8 hours out at sea due to a disco strobe or something like that, do you think they would have made the same rush to judgement? The equivalent to what they did would have been an immediate return to port / airlift.

 

I tend to think that had the ship been out at sea they would have taken a little more time to listen to her explanation / evaluate the situation before doing a 180 and heading towards shore.

 

It seemed convenient (time wise and money) since they were still in port to give her the boot and be done with it. IMO, that was a bad call on their part, especially because she alluded to the ship waiting for them to leave before heading out...

 

That's part of the point.

 

It's much easier for the patient to deal with it while still at land. If there was a real issue and they'd already left, it would cause extra complication and cost for the passenger to get treatment while at sea.

 

If you have a medical issue, wouldn't you prefer for it to arise when medical facilities are more accessible, than when they are not?

[The_Big_M]

I am totally baffled at how so many here have NO IDEA what is involved with providing exceptional customer service.

 

I suspect many have a good idea what exceptional customer service is.

 

They just don't agree with unwarranted customer service.

[markeb]

That's part of the point.

 

It's much easier for the patient to deal with it while still at land. If there was a real issue and they'd already left, it would cause extra complication and cost for the passenger to get treatment while at sea.

 

If you have a medical issue, wouldn't you prefer for it to arise when medical facilities are more accessible, than when they are not?

 

The more I think about this, the more uncertain I am.

 

First of all, you, as the patient, at least in the United States, unless incapacitated without an advance directive, generally have the right to refuse medical care (in this case, a referral to the ER). Continuing on the cruise "against medical advice" would have been an elective choice that in the rush was not considered (understandably).

 

A second order question, not directly related to the OPs problem but one I'm uncertain of, is the qualification (legally, not professionally) of the physician. Once in international waters, the ship's medical staff is subject to international maritime regulations; docked in Baltimore (and probably especially Maryland!), I have to assume the physician would have to be licensed in the state of Maryland to practice medicine? If so, and if they were not, that raises a number of questions that go beyond this post.

 

I don't know what the actual protocol is for denying boarding or continued carriage due to medical conditions. I assume that for a coherent passenger capable of making decisions for their own care, it's a recommendation by the physician to the captain, and ultimately the decision of the master of the ship. That muddies the liability question quite a bit.

 

In this case, the OP does have travel insurance, but frankly they are probably in a gray area as they had a preexisting tendency to migraines, but is that a pre-existing condition? And, either way, this was a 40th anniversary cruise. You don't get a second chance at that!

 

I do find it odd when I look at the compensation offered to passengers on the Explorer for noro which unless it traces to a preventable issue with a crewmember is probably NOT RCI's fault versus their treatment of the OP where it was a positive decision of RCI to deprive the OP of the vacation they had paid for. With Explorer, RCI compensated people for a condition that likely could not have been predicted and can only minimally be prevented. Kind of like the OPs migraine situation...

[Oppalopa]

I am so sorry you were treated like that please consult a Attorney.

[lovetocruise75]

I am so sorry you were treated like that please consult a Attorney.

 

 

And waste money on a battle she will not win? Read the cruise contract. It is unfortunate but RCCL probably made the right choice. They have every right to do so. Don't consult an attorney. You will waste time and money!

[Paulxyz2004]

I suspect many have a good idea what exceptional customer service is.

 

They just don't agree with unwarranted customer service.

 

I couldn´t have said it any better.

[Paulxyz2004]

As for the insurance comments, I´m not from the US, so don´t know about the insurance policies in the US.

Where I live a "regular" travel insurance usually covers for cancellations - reasons covered for cancellation of course vary.

Then there are different insurances that cover trip disruption.

If you don´t have an insurance covering trip disruption, your protection sort of Ends once the trip started.

Now in case of the OP, while the ship had not set sail, they had boarded, so I would say their trip had started already and only trip disruption would kick in, but it´s not a cancellation at that Point anymore.

[Badlands99]

I suspect many have a good idea what exceptional customer service is.

 

They just don't agree with unwarranted customer service.

 

Oh, look. I found someone else who doesn't know the meaning of "exceptional customer service."

 

Giving this lady a refund, even though it is 'unwarranted,' would be the very essence of 'exceptional customer service.' That's kinda the point.

[S.A.M.J.R.]

I suspect many have a good idea what exceptional customer service is.

 

They just don't agree with unwarranted customer service.

The question is whether refunding the cruise is unwarranted. I think the cruise SHOULD be refunded.

[Oppalopa]

The question is whether refunding the cruise is unwarranted. I think the cruise SHOULD be refunded.

I agree

[Paulxyz2004]

The question is whether refunding the cruise is unwarranted. I think the cruise SHOULD be refunded.

 

 

See and others - myself included - think it is unwarranted and the cruise should not be refunded.

 

Different opinions - simple as that.

[sharpasice]

No, I didn't. And nowhere in the televised announcements of the lifeboat drill nor in the printed information was there anything at all warning of them. It wouldn't have cost RC a penny to add "Strobe lights will go off in the corridor" right after "The ship will blow its horn in thus-and-such a pattern."

 

Had I known, I would have asked DH to check the corridor to make sure that they had stopped, or covered my eyes and had him lead me out.

 

Seriously? I have worked all over the country and have been in many fire drills in all types of buildings. When I worked in a hospital, in an office building, in a school and for that matter in any public building when the fire alarms went off strobe lights were ALWAYS functioning.

[Paulxyz2004]

Oh, look. I found someone else who doesn't know the meaning of "exceptional customer service."

 

Giving this lady a refund, even though it is 'unwarranted,' would be the very essence of 'exceptional customer service.' That's kinda the point.

 

 

It would be the very essence of exceptional bad customer Service.

I believe good customer Service is not about throwing out refunds or compensations just for the sake of it and totally unwarranted, as that is a truly bad Signal for how a Company is run and IMO a bad Signal to all customers using the Company / product.

I avoid businesses with an overly generous customer Service policy, as I know this Kind of policy has to be paid by every singel customer in the Long run and it will attract the shady Folks that will complain about everything to get refunds. There´s just too many that work the Systems.

Yes it can pay up to a Company to just pay for the complainer to shut up and go away, but it also can greatly pay to stand their grounds.

I say it again Kudos to RCI in this case for staying their grounds and not pay up any fraudulent Claims.

[Roce48]

I kinda doubt this.

I agree with you, but there are unscrupulous individuals out there. Many people have lost big money trusting the wrong people. I have not seen a response from OP about a refusal letter. Until that is received, I would not be satisfied. OP has still not answered my question about filing the claim, and who the insurance company is.

[babyher]

Oh, look. I found someone else who doesn't know the meaning of "exceptional customer service."

 

Giving this lady a refund, even though it is 'unwarranted,' would be the very essence of 'exceptional customer service.' That's kinda the point.

 

 

 

 

So exceptional customer service is just caving in and giving someone whatever they demand , whether they are entitled to it or not?

[spookwife]

The question is whether refunding the cruise is unwarranted. I think the cruise SHOULD be refunded.

 

BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. that was the whole point of purchasing Cruise insurance in the first place..

 

why skip that step? the OP needs to go through her insurance company FIRST before demanding Royal refund her one red cent. at best, and I am full of 'exceptional customer service' here( I was in the industry for over a decade and I left it because the customer is NOT always right and their attitude usually sucked making it very hard to even WANT to give them squat) is for Royal to possibly offer OBC for the difference between what the Travel insurance pays out and the actual total cost of the cruise.

 

from a liability standpoint, Royal did nothing wrong and is not obligated to do any more. assuming that you are entitled to anything beyond the letter of the contract is self serving and will only lead to the lawyers making it even harder for companies to be willing to do anything above and beyond.

 

Life isn't fair.

[Tapi]

I'm pretty freaked about an ER doctor taking 20 minutes to determine things...

 

 

I'm not a big fan of ER doctors and their "sometimes too quick" diagnosis, specially after I went to the ER a few years ago and the doctor told me that I had ALS or Lou Gehrig's Disease! (Basically a death sentence :eek:). Turns out I only had a viral infection and I was back to normal in 48 hours.

 

But I do understand that in situations like what the OP experienced, the wise thing to do is to err on the side of caution which is what Royal did. Sucks for the OP but it was the right thing to do.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Edited February 8, 2014 by Tapi

[The_Big_M]

So exceptional customer service is just caving in and giving someone whatever they demand , whether they are entitled to it or not?

 

Seemingly.

 

Yet exceptional is meant to mean out of the ordinary, unexpected.

 

People requesting this as though they are entitled to a full refund will not see it as exceptional. They are demanding it, and expect companies to cave into their demands "otherwise they'll badmouth the companies' reputation."