Royal Caribbean kicked me off cruise ship for having a migraine

[clean1owner]

To the OP

 

 

 

My wife has been suffering from migraines since she was 10 years old, and I have been around them as long as I have known her (28 years). Hers are hormonal and can also be triggered by red wine. She had an aura on our first ever date and kind of freaked me out at the time. Her auras aren't quite as bad as yours, she gets the squiggly lines, vision loss, and light and sound sensitivity. No numbness or slurred speech. Like you, she takes an Imitrex (the wonder drug Caffergot could only dream to be), lies down in a dark room for about an hour, and she is good to go.

If I had a dollar for every event we have had to cut short / miss / disappear for a while, We would have enough for a cruise. Add to that a dollar for every time someone has asked "Do you need a Dr. / Ambulance / me to call 911, and we could cruise like Super Mario!

 

I very well know your pain, and had the same thing happened to us, I'm sure we would be feeling very much the same as you do.

 

However, with this hyper sensitive and overly litigious society we now live in, I can also understand RCCL's position. As hard as it is to accept, they probably did the right thing.

 

 

 

 

 

Most migrane sufferers don't experience migranes when on low-carb, high-fat diets, so you might want to consider cutting out carbs just before the cruise to reduce the likelyhood of this happening on your next cruise.

 

 

I always love it when the uninformed feel the need to offer their "expert" advise.

 

My wife has tried every "Migraine Prevention" diet published, and guess what?

 

THEY DON'T WORK FOR HER!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If they've had them for 40 years, and haven't looked at the clinical studies, then maybe they do. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=245128

 

This is the 21st century, and based on our knowledge, migraines should be a very rare condition.

 

 

Other Articles | December 13, 1930

 

MIGRAINE

 

RESULTS OF TREATMENT BY KETOGENIC DIET IN FIFTY CASES

CLIFFORD J. BARBORKA, M.D.

 

 

JAMA. 1930;95(24):1825-1828. doi:10.1001/jama.1930.02720240035010.

 

 

So you are going to quote an 83 year old article that was published Dec. 13, 1930? And they studied a whopping 50 cases?

 

I think I will go with something a little more current, and a little more broad.

 

 

If ignorance is bliss, there are some very happy people here on Cruise Critic.

[crookedhalo]

Okay, here's a question for those of you who are saying that Royal should have done 'the right thing' and given her a refund to show their empathy.

 

Where do you draw the line? There has to be one.... when does it become okay for Royal to refuse passage? A limb falling off? I know I'm way overboard here, but seriously - where is that magic line??:confused:

 

I think that Royal did the right thing. There have been too many (some reported here) cases where a migraine wasn't a migraine. Yeah it sucks that you didn't get to go on your vacation, but you're still here with your spouse. If they had let the OP board and then they had further/worse symptoms, what would you be saying then? I don't think the Chesapeake Bay is wide enough to turn a boat around, so it would have to be medivac or wait to Hampton Roads...neither a good option to me:( JMHO

[Paulxyz2004]

LA CA GAL raised a good point, though; RCL missed a golden opportunity for excellent PR. If they had reimbursed the OP's fares and offered a credit, they (RCL) would've been out of pocket what - say, 3k each? (OP didn't say what the fares were). But the potential good PR fallout could easily have been worth ten or a hundred times that; in this age of the internet, each person's voice reaches much, much farther. If they had, I'm pretty sure the OP would have been telling friends and family, as well as here, about how RCL went the extra mile to make it right, and as every business knows, word of mouth can be the most effective advertising there is. ...

 

I highly doubt this. If RCI had payed up we most likely would have never heard this Story at all. The OP just searched for Websites to badmouth RCI when they denied the Claim. I don´t believe they would have searched the Internet for sites where they could have praised RCI for refunding their cruise fare.

Even if they had refunded the cruise fare, the OP might still had been disgruntled because they missed their cruise and they might still have complained and knowing some Posters on here they would have still said dare RCI for kicking them off.

 

It was a no win situation for RCI. Another matter of fact in public media is there is no such Thing as bad News. Even a bad Headline that mentions a Company is some sort of advertisement.

[markeb]

Caveat: I am not a cheerleader for any line, except The Grey Funnel Line :).

 

From where I sit, I think Royal Caribbean did the correct thing procedurally. The question of assisting the OP to take her Imitrex is odd, as noted previously (and to the recent poster who said it was from ship's stores; no it wasn't; re-read OP's OP). However, severe migraines do present very similiarly to TIA or stroke and the medical staff onboard, including the doctor, don't have the benefit of knowing the OP's case history. So yes, I think RCL acted correctly.

 

 

She posted a later clarification on that point; yes, it was dispensed onboard.

 

 

Oh, yes! Remember that line about "They gave me my Imitrex?" They didn't allow me to take it on my own. They dispensed it to me -- THEY removed it from the packaging and handed it to me. Imitrex is specifically contraindicated in a stroke situation, as it is designed to cause vascular changes in the brain. It could be extremely dangerous or perhaps even fatal in such a case.

 

So there is one of two actionable possibilities here:

 

1.) The doctor recognized Imitrex as a migraine medication, and by dispensing it acknowledged that I WAS having a migraine and so did not warrant forcible disembarkation

 

OR

 

2.) Gave an UNKNOWN medication to a person suspected of having a stroke, when a quick consult with a Physician's Desk Reference or a call to a local ER would have revealed that this was a specifically contraindicated medication.

 

None of us know what she was actually told (and I suspect her own memory isn't perfect, all things considered). Was she told "you must leave the ship" (which would imply an active decision at least at the hotel manager's level), or "you should go to the ER to check this out" (which would be pure medical advice), and were the ramifications of each explained? Sail away is typically about an hour after the Muster Drill, so you are in pain, probably a little confused, absolutely in shock that the physician is even considering that you shouldn't go on your cruise, etc. Personally, under similar circumstances (if in good control of my faculties, which I might not be under similar circumstances) I would have declined treatment against medical advice, and headed for my cabin to lay down. If the ship's management denied me carriage, then I probably have little recourse other than through insurance and/or litigation.

 

And I am more than a little baffled by those who say a passenger with a history of migraines somehow violated their contract by not truly being fit to travel. Anyone with any sort of preexisting condition, whether it be migraines, recovering from cancer, hypertension, etc. could decompensate at any time, but more likely than not they won't.

 

As to the question of where the line is on "doing the right thing", I don't know, but denying passage in this case and not offering a future cruise is not over the line. Oh, and if the OP has RCI's trip insurance, and that insurance is underwritten by RCCL (I don't know), then RCCL is out the cost of the cruise through it's insurance policy, lost onboard income from the cabin, AND created a negative impression with a potential repeat customer... That sounds like a win for them all around!

[summersigh]

I think that Royal did the right thing. There have been too many (some reported here) cases where a migraine wasn't a migraine. Yeah it sucks that you didn't get to go on your vacation, but you're still here with your spouse. If they had let the OP board and then they had further/worse symptoms, what would you be saying then? I don't think the Chesapeake Bay is wide enough to turn a boat around, so it would have to be medivac or wait to Hampton Roads...neither a good option to me:( JMHO

 

We agree with you crookedhalo. If rccl sailed with someone with symptoms that may or may not be a migraine/ or stroke and it erupted into a crisis - the OP would be suing RCCL for a fortune.:cool:

 

I assume OP was telling the ship's staff the truth about what was happening with the wife BUT there are others who would say anything to keep from being denied their cruise. Example -->to keep from being denied the trip, the passengers who bring Noro onto ships are likely feeling poorly when they sign that health form saying that they're fine and dandy - then go on to "share" their virus with the rest of us.:mad:

 

Things like this are why DH and I always buy insurance and would expect any reimbursement to come through the insurance company.

[Kellie Poodle]

And I am more than a little baffled by those who say a passenger with a history of migraines somehow violated their contract by not truly being fit to travel. Anyone with any sort of preexisting condition, whether it be migraines, recovering from cancer, hypertension, etc. could decompensate at any time, but more likely than not they won't.

 

That is what the contract says. If she was "fit to travel" then she wouldn't have been put off the ship. I'm not being mean. We all sign that contract.

 

People with a pre-existing condition will usually inquire about things that can affect them aboard the ship. Also the pre-existing condition can have consequences with travel insurance payment.

 

The OP was not prepared. Since we know she can find Cruise Critic to complain, why couldn't she find it to ask about the possibilities of triggers to her migraines? Having had this condition for so many years, one would think she would be pro-active about it.

 

I do feel sorry for her. I know, personally, what it is like to be put off the ship because of an illness and in our case it was in a foreign country where we did not speak the language. (this problem was not due to pre-existing conditions)

 

When the medical condition is mine, I don't expect others to be responsible for what I haven't done for myself. I think the OP needs to take some responsibility for the situation.

 

We are all grown ups here. We are supposed to know how to care for ourselves.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Kellie Poodle

[emdia43]

Once the examining Physician said she was not fit to travel, it was all over- it was out of Royal Caribbean's hands. I don't think even the Captain could over-rule an MD opinion. Take it up with the Dr's employer would be my advice - good luck with that.

[Ocean Boy]

She posted a later clarification on that point; yes, it was dispensed onboard.

 

 

 

 

None of us know what she was actually told (and I suspect her own memory isn't perfect, all things considered). Was she told "you must leave the ship" (which would imply an active decision at least at the hotel manager's level), or "you should go to the ER to check this out" (which would be pure medical advice), and were the ramifications of each explained? Sail away is typically about an hour after the Muster Drill, so you are in pain, probably a little confused, absolutely in shock that the physician is even considering that you shouldn't go on your cruise, etc. Personally, under similar circumstances (if in good control of my faculties, which I might not be under similar circumstances) I would have declined treatment against medical advice, and headed for my cabin to lay down. If the ship's management denied me carriage, then I probably have little recourse other than through insurance and/or litigation.

 

And I am more than a little baffled by those who say a passenger with a history of migraines somehow violated their contract by not truly being fit to travel. Anyone with any sort of preexisting condition, whether it be migraines, recovering from cancer, hypertension, etc. could decompensate at any time, but more likely than not they won't.

 

As to the question of where the line is on "doing the right thing", I don't know, but denying passage in this case and not offering a future cruise is not over the line. Oh, and if the OP has RCI's trip insurance, and that insurance is underwritten by RCCL (I don't know), then RCCL is out the cost of the cruise through it's insurance policy, lost onboard income from the cabin, AND created a negative impression with a potential repeat customer... That sounds like a win for them all around!

It is true that any one individual probably won't decompensate but in a ship's population of over 5000 people it is quite likely that someone will. And it happens on almost every cruise according to a ship's physician that I had a chat with. And our life experiences tend play into decisions that we make . As I stated earlier, it is much better to deal with the issue dockside than out at sea. Practicing medicine out at sea is much different from on land where all sorts of back up, equipment, and specialists are available. And some people on this thread just don't get it. An incorrect diagnosis dose not indicate an incompetent doctor. And in this case the doctor simply was not sure of the diagnosis. He doesn't sound incompetent to me. I would call him prudent. It is too bad that the OP doesn't seen to get that either.

[Ocean Boy]

Once the examining Physician said she was not fit to travel, it was all over- it was out of Royal Caribbean's hands. I don't think even the Captain could over-rule an MD opinion. Take it up with the Dr's employer would be my advice - good luck with that.

 

I suspect that any captain that over rides a physicians medical judgment would not be viewed very favorably by RCI. Imagine the legal quagmire that would open up for the company. As for taking the situation with the physician's employer, they would probably contend, and correctly so, that he acted quite prudently on both the part of the patient as well as the other thousands of people aboard the ship who were also looking forward to their vacations and not having it interrupted by a medical issue at sea that was presenting before the ship left port.

[markeb]

It is true that any one individual probably won't decompensate but in a ship's population of over 5000 people it is quite likely that someone will. And it happens on almost every cruise according to a ship's physician that I had a chat with. And our life experiences tend play into decisions that we make . As I stated earlier, it is much better to deal with the issue dockside than out at sea. Practicing medicine out at sea is much different from on land where all sorts of back up, equipment, and specialists are available. And some people on this thread just don't get it. An incorrect diagnosis dose not indicate an incompetent doctor. And in this case the doctor simply was not sure of the diagnosis. He doesn't sound incompetent to me. I would call him prudent. It is too bad that the OP doesn't seen to get that either.

 

For the record, I think we agree far more than we disagree. Internet forums don't give a great opportunity for intellectual exchange. And I defer largely as Homo sapiens is the one member of the kingdom Animalia that I am not licensed to practice medicine on...

 

I do think that administering a drug that carries what appears to be an absolute contraindication for administration to someone suspected of suffering a cerebrovascular event, and whose administration would effect cerebral bloodflow, intracranial pressure, and likely make it more difficult to differentiate a stroke from a migraine, THEN recommending they be denied passage for medical reasons, has opened himself to criticism. That doesn't make him incompetent (I yield on my first post on this topic), but his actions should certainly be questioned. I do believe prudence would have required you to rule out a stroke before administering the drug, which would have avoided this entire issue...

 

And, I will now shut up on this subject. I hope the OP gets some form of satisfaction. And I honestly don't blame her for never going on RCI again...

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

Okay, here's a question for those of you who are saying that Royal should have done 'the right thing' and given her a refund to show their empathy.

 

Where do you draw the line? There has to be one.... when does it become okay for Royal to refuse passage? A limb falling off? I know I'm way overboard here, but seriously - where is that magic line??:confused:

 

I think that Royal did the right thing. There have been too many (some reported here) cases where a migraine wasn't a migraine. Yeah it sucks that you didn't get to go on your vacation, but you're still here with your spouse. If they had let the OP board and then they had further/worse symptoms, what would you be saying then? I don't think the Chesapeake Bay is wide enough to turn a boat around, so it would have to be medivac or wait to Hampton Roads...neither a good option to me:( JMHO

I think you're confusing the two issues. Personally, I'm not knocking RCI for denying passage. I'm not convinced it was the right decision, but I'm not going to fault them for being cautious.

 

I do fault them for not refunding the money. Again, the passenger did nothing to break the contract.

[go noles]

Hi,

 

I am sorry that you had to experience this ....... but did you notify RCI , that you do have migraine for many years and what they recommend for you to cruise ? or not ? or to bring some form of a letter from your doctor explaining your problems and symptoms ?

 

How they suppose to know to warn you about the flashing lights if they do not know that this will cause you a problem ?

 

How did the medic suppose to know that it is migraine and not something very serious ?

 

How would the media react if it was stroke and the medical department did not send you to local hospital ?

 

What would happen if the ship left the port and your migrane turned into something very serious - they would have to turn back to get you help ..... do you think that lost time would not affect the rest of the cruise ?

 

Sorry for you, but I think the ship medics did what they did for your good .... and for the good of rest of the cruisers.

 

And the insurance is there to cover such a incidents...... I hope that you purchased one that covers preexisting conditions.

 

I hope you feel well.

 

No you don't

[Az's Cruising Nana]

It is true that any one individual probably won't decompensate but in a ship's population of over 5000 people it is quite likely that someone will. And it happens on almost every cruise according to a ship's physician that I had a chat with. And our life experiences tend play into decisions that we make . As I stated earlier, it is much better to deal with the issue dockside than out at sea. Practicing medicine out at sea is much different from on land where all sorts of back up, equipment, and specialists are available. And some people on this thread just don't get it. An incorrect diagnosis dose not indicate an incompetent doctor. And in this case the doctor simply was not sure of the diagnosis. He doesn't sound incompetent to me. I would call him prudent. It is too bad that the OP doesn't seen to get that either.

 

Agree and being out to sea and having to be airlifted off after experiancing stroke like symptoms for several hours is also going to make any pt unable to recieve clotbusting medications in the case of a CVA.. The medical world has discovered that diagnosing and treating strokes as soon as possible is the best way to save patients from losing more of their function. Everyone that presents with stroke like symptoms are now treated as though it is a stroke until ruled out. I would be curious if the ER did a CT or not before making the decision it was merely a migraine?

 

Before you travel again I would get a note from my MD and a medic alert bracelet making people aware of your condition. I am not sure if either would do the trick if you were to exhibit the same symptoms because I think you would still find yourself back in the ER having yourself examined to R/O stroke.

 

I sympathize with the OP and can well imagine the disappointment experianced by not being able to celebrate your anniversary. Seriously it would not hurt RCCL to let them transfer the cost of the lost cruise to another. I am glad you have discovered the boards and for the most part they can be informative when planning your next cruise. Had you discovered them before you left you may have be spared all this heartache.

 

Sue

[Jackytar]

Hi,

 

I am sorry that you had to experience this ....... but did you notify RCI , that you do have migraine for many years and what they recommend for you to cruise ? or not ? or to bring some form of a letter from your doctor explaining your problems and symptoms ?

 

How they suppose to know to warn you about the flashing lights if they do not know that this will cause you a problem ?

 

How did the medic suppose to know that it is migraine and not something very serious ?

 

How would the media react if it was stroke and the medical department did not send you to local hospital ?

 

What would happen if the ship left the port and your migrane turned into something very serious - they would have to turn back to get you help ..... do you think that lost time would not affect the rest of the cruise ?

 

Sorry for you, but I think the ship medics did what they did for your good .... and for the good of rest of the cruisers.

 

And the insurance is there to cover such a incidents...... I hope that you purchased one that covers preexisting conditions.

 

I hope you feel well.

 

No you don't

 

Oy.

[Coralc]

sounds to me like there is a whole lot more going on then meets the eye.. with her history how could she get insurance?

 

I have no idea. It's a blog post on another website. I think it is just a cautionary tale recommending travel insurance. And I think it's a guy. Guys seem to get gout more often than women do.

 

People can get travel insurance with pre-existing conditions, they just have to pay the cost and purchase it within the parameters of the policy. :)

Edited February 9, 2014 by Coralc

[Silverman]

I knew there was a reason why I have always hated Cheerleaders.

[riclop]

RCCL is calling you.

[The_Big_M]

If you worked for RCCL, then no one would ever have to buy trip insurance. And you would not have a job with them for very long.:D

 

Nicely put :-)

[The_Big_M]

All I have to add is I have never seen the flashing lights. I guess because I get to muster on time not late?

 

I've seen them - after the drill. (And no, I didn't skip early or anything else.)

[Kellie Poodle]

People can get travel insurance with pre-existing conditions, they just have to pay the cost and purchase it within the parameters of the policy. :)

 

Exactly! Within a week after booking a cruise I purchase travel insurance that covers pre-existing conditions. It has to be purchased within anywhere from 2 to 3 weeks depending upon the company.

 

I pay the minimum amount and add to the coverage when we buy air fare and when we make final payment. I also cover private excursions.

[The_Big_M]

I do fault them for not refunding the money. Again, the passenger did nothing to break the contract.

 

While that's true, it's not that the line was the cause of the condition either. They took action, but as you agreed, there was apparent justification for it.

 

And then if they're not at fault, why should they lose money either.

 

Hence, the situation that that's what insurance is for. Just like if your house burns down or a multitude of other issues where it's not your fault, you have insurance to compensate for the loss, not try to get money from someone else who has an involvement. Unless you don't have insurance at all... in which case you try to make a claim that way.

[fishtaco]

What surprises me about this is that the OP (and some others) seem surprised by the existence of the strobe lights in the hallways. They are pretty much standard in most commercial buildings (ever had a fire alarm in an office building, hotel, or college dorm?). They are ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) mandated in commercial designs- it is a 'visual siren' for those with hearing disabilities.

 

This must also be why elevators in USA "Ding" when going up and "Dong" when going down!

 

In Australia they just 'Ding" both ways:)

[tomatosauce]

In both the USA and Australia (and RCI cruise ships) the sounds accompanying the lift arriving are 1 ping when going up and 2 pings when going down.

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

My quote feature isn't working, but I wanted to answer the question "Why should RCI lose money?"

 

Because they accepted the passenger's money and decided they wouldn't give her what she paid for. I don't understand how people feel it's OK to keep someone's money but not give them a cruise. :confused:

 

I still compare this to buying an item in a store, paying for it, then when it's delivered, the STORE determines you can't have it AND keeps your money. That's OK?

[Cruzin RN]

I lose my vision when I first get a migraine. I once was in that stage of the headache when we checked in. I put on my sunglasses and told my dh to just point and elbow me if i had to sign anything.....downplayed it,cause I figured they would have issues boarding me if they noticed. Migraine symptoms do minic a stroke....

So sorry that the op had that experience...a cruise, a massage and an acupuncture session would have made you better!!!!