84 yrs old died after being put off a cruise.

[the english lady]

It's all about money!

 

They milk you (or your insurer) for all they can, and if you show the slightest sign of not making a complete recovery imminently, it's off the ship for you and yours!

 

Please note £300-odd quid for oxygen, £160-odd for "disembarkation" arrangements.

 

If you croak on Royal Caribbean they charge about £120 for "post-mortem care".....for a bit of cotton wool and a plastic bag and a berth in the freezer!

 

Thing is if you are quoting what a ship charges, it states that you are being charged as a PRIVATE patient, We are too used to the NHS here.

I remember someone came on here a few years ago and complained about their wife having a £500 bill for antbios and a couple of other things for a chest infection I think. Most people who replied said that was on a par with that you would be charged if you saw a doctor privately in the UK. So not milking charging on a par with private medicine.

[daiB]

Kalos quoted

Mr Wright, a haulage contractor, said they struggled to get help from their travel insurance so were forced to pay for hotels and medical bills and claim it back later.

He added: ‘I had to transfer our savings to the hospital … The insurance company was taking too long."

 

Insurance companies, like cruise lines, are subject to scrutiny by their shareholders, so they will always want to ensure that they are not being asked to pay out more than necessary.

So why do you want to name and shame them more than P&O?

 

 

Because P&O as well as every other cruise line will transfer of the ship anyone who they cannot treat or if the passenger is in danger. At that point the insurance company should take over. Remember you are not allowed to board without cover.

 

The final decision is the doctors. However I am told that the firm he works for, not P&O who are USA based a will insist that passengers are sent to hospital. The decision is not down to P&O, or any other cruise line that you can cruise with.

[kalos]

Insurance companies, like cruise lines, are subject to scrutiny by their shareholders, so they will always want to ensure that they are not being asked to pay out more than necessary.

So why do you want to name and shame them more than P&O?

 

Hi John ,

I don't want them more than P&O ,It seems P&O are taking all the flack whilst the insurance seems to get away scott free up to yet .

 

I would like more info as to how the Insurance helped or not . My travel insurance has "Emergency Helplines " built into it ,did the families have help like this ?

Who knows maybe the insurance were not to blame but it seems unfair to place the blame at P&O's door when they did help the woman as best as they could at that time .

[richleeds]

Because P&O as well as every other cruise line will transfer of the ship anyone who they cannot treat or if the passenger is in danger. At that point the insurance company should take over. Remember you are not allowed to board without cover.

 

The final decision is the doctors. However I am told that the firm he works for, not P&O who are USA based a will insist that passengers are sent to hospital. The decision is not down to P&O, or any other cruise line that you can cruise with.

 

Yes, it is Medlink, they also work for the airlines, they know exactly what each ship/plane has onboard as regard medical equipment and what level the staff are trained to.

 

Once Medlink take over the liability lies with them.

[jeanlyon]

I was treated wonderfully when I had severe diverticulitis on the ship. We had left Newfoundland and were 500 miles out on our way home. My care was wonderful. I was in danger of perforating my bowel, but the doctor was just great, told me exactly what we had to do. I was on a drip twice a day for 4 days. It was about £1000 and yes my insurance covered it all.

[Sea Green]

It has always been the policy of all cruise ships to off-load any more than slightly under-the-weather pax at the earliest opportunity!

 

The ship's hospital is well-equipped to deal with many medical situations, but they do not dare do so for fear of being sued for negligence!

 

"There are a wide range of medical facilities on board our ships including:

• ECG
  
• Nebuliser
  
• Oxygen
  
• X-Ray
  
• Pathology including blood tests such as INR, FBC (full blood count), U&E (urea & electrolytes) and LTF (Liver function test)
  
• In-patient Ward
  
• 24 hr Emergency Medical Services
  
• Variety of medication
  
• Administer injections (e.g insulin)
  
• Defibrillator
  

These facilities are not intended or designed to provide ongoing treatment of pre-existing medical conditions.

All our Doctors and Nurses on board our ships are fully qualified and trained to assist in emergency situations.

There is typically one Senior Doctor, one Doctor and approximately three nurses on board. The number of medical staff is dependent on the size of the ship."

 

 

Looking at the breakdown of the medical bill, P&O seem to have provided most of the above. No ships medical centre could be expected to provide the same level of care as a land based hospital, and the options once in open sea are limited.

 

P&O should have clearly told the family they were cancelling the hotel and flight part of the package, though. However seeing she was ill enough to be disembarked i assume P&0 would have expected the family to seek hospital care and then return home from Mexico. Seems the family didnt realise how frail / ill the poor lady was and decided to attempt to carry on with the holiday, and it wass all to much for her?

 

As for deaths at sea, I have heard of a gentleman dying the start of a world cruise and his wife electing to continue with the holiday,meaning the ship had to complete arrangements and paperwork for bringing a dead body into a country at EVRY SINGLE PORT OF CALL.......

[soobs]

Gosh seagreen, what a plucky lady carrying on with her cruise, I really admire that but never thought of the complications around a body being on board surely they didn't keep him on board for the hole of the WC?

[Sea Green]

Gosh seagreen, what a plucky lady carrying on with her cruise, I really admire that but never thought of the complications around a body being on board surely they didn't keep him on board for the hole of the WC?

 

I believe they did. The ship must have had some err, 'cold storage facility'. As memory serves it was Fred Olsen, and no offence to Fred passengers but judging by age demographic it must be something of a fairly regular occurrence for them. (If anyone saw that dreadful programme The Cruise, didnt about 2 passengers die during filming?)

 

You have to admire the ladys pluck. I dont know what happened to her afterwards but i like to think she had him cremated, booked another WC and scattered the ashes somewhere amazing.

[Scriv]

Without being privvy to all the true facts and certainly not just from an article in the Daily Mail, none of us can know what really happened here. We are in no pisition to question P&O, the doctors or the insurance companies.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Scriv

[jeanlyon]

Scriv, couldn't agree more. We don't know all the facts. However, I am well aware that no all cabins are always sold. They need to keep some for "events". There is a cold storage area, coffins etc. It's obvious really.

[KaththeTaff]

I think P&O were in a lose lose situation. They did not make the decision to offload, it would have been a medical decision. If the doctor had let the ill patient remain on board and something had happened as a result, P&O would still be in the firing line.

[indiana123]

We don't know the full details so the following is just to state what came up in a conversation.

 

I was talking to a lady in the Hairdressers., I mentioned that my insurance is quite high because of an illness and she hardly believed me as her 87 year old Mother had got cruise Insurance for well under a hundred. It wasn't a short cruise.

 

She said they just go on comparison sites and pick the cheapest., I asked if this included her Mother's pre-existing conditions and she said she had no idea!

I said sometimes they are not included as I had been offered those.

 

I cannot believe that some do not know the simple terms and that there could be exclusions.

[indiana123]

We don't know the full details so the following is just to state what came up in a conversation.

 

I was talking to a lady in the Hairdressers., I mentioned that my insurance is quite high because of an illness and she hardly believed me as her 87 year old Mother had got cruise Insurance for well under a hundred. It wasn't a short cruise.

 

She said they just go on comparison sites and pick the cheapest., I asked if this included her Mother's pre-existing conditions and she said she had no idea!

I said sometimes they are not included as I had been offered those.

 

I cannot believe that some do not know the simple terms and that there could be exclusions.

 

I also feel that P and O were dammed if they did and damned if they didn't.

[dsrdsrdsr]

Pre-existing conditions in the UK are never covered unless disclosed when you buy the insurance.

 

Once the doctor has said the lady must leave the ship and go to hospital, P&O had absolutely no choice. A poorly old lady is not in a fit state to waive all her rights to emergency care if she stays on board and something goes wrong; her family can't waive the rights for her. Whether the doctor was right or not, only hindsight can tell you. We only know what did happen, we can never know what might have happened.

 

I would expect far more insurance help than they appear to have received. The one time I needed insurance assistance, in Norway for my father, we didn't have to book anything apart from to extend our stay in the hotel we were at, plus a taxi to the airport. The insurance company booked flights home, limousine in the UK, everything. Nor did they quibble at my father's operation (on a broken wrist) being done in Norway when there was the option to fly home with it strapped up and have it done in England. Though we didn't stress that there was a choice!

Edited February 8, 2015 by dsrdsrdsr

[Mysticalmother]

My sympathy does of course go to the family in this case. None of us know the full facts , all we do know is that there is a grieving family who have had their holiday ruined by the loss of an loved one. The merits of them discussing their loss to the Daily wail are however questionable - IMHO.

 

Another aspect of travel insurance that some might overlook is that most insurance companies require you to inform them of any serious illness of a close relative that could result in you making a future claim. Eg if a parent has a pre- existing heart condition, cancer etc should they be taken ill either shortly before or during your holiday you will not be covered for any cancellation costs, or flights home unless you have previously advised the insurers and they have accepted the risk. Always read the small print - carefully.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Mysticalmother
Typo

[janny444]

I have been following this "story" and thread with interest as it is something I have thought about for some time.

P&O...or any other cruise line...where never going to have done the right thing ...as far as publicity is concerned they are in a lose lose situation.

However what this story has done is raise awareness as to the possibilities that can happen when one is cruising/traveling abroad which includes flights.When one is getter older...possibly infirm...as I am ..is to ask themselves...if this happenned to me...more so in some far-flung place....could I cope with having to deal with the very very difficult circumstances and aftermath. A few years ago I was taken ill in Tenerife...not so far-flung...but still difficult enough. I was "whisked" into hospital and there was a lady in her eighties in the next bed who had had a stroke a few weeks previously. It was an horrible situation for them. She and her husband had gone for a holiday...she had a stroke..he was staying in a budget hotel as that is what the insurance company agreed to..no 4/5 star luxury...no family support...waiting for the doctor to sign the paper...as I had to...that she was fit to fly. When she was allowed to fly it had to be with a medical team. They were desperate to get home.

So two things....never ever travel without insurance...I know it is an obvious statement but so many people....including elderly...do..and be sure that you could deal with the consequences of being seriously ill while abroad.

[Jill85]

She died. The Dr was probably very aware her condition was deteriorating when he made the decision to offload her.

 

There is no "medical centre" on board, there is a room with a few basic drugs and a defib and sutures etc and a single Dr with a nurse - they are not able to provide 24 hour care.

 

Of course it was awful the lady died and we all feel desperately sorry for the family involved who probably felt very helpless in a foreign country.

 

Once offloaded it is down to your insurance company as to where you are treated and they would have been in a position to fly her to Miami for example for better care if they felt that appropriate and she was stable enough for the journey.

 

P&O were never going to come out smelling of roses on this one, if they kept her onboard and she died the family would be questioning why the Dr didnt offload her when he had chance at a port to a fully functional hospital and instead kept her onboard with a single Dr and limited care and limited facilities.

 

On that ship there are two Drs. and intensive care! with four nurses. We had a tour of the ship and a chat to the senior Dr. they have everything they need!

[English Voyager]

To repeat the question I raised in an earlier post.

 

Why did P & O cancel the family's pre-booked hotel in, and flight from, San Francisco when Mr Robinson, the ill lady's husband, had remained on board the ship to disembark in San Francisco?

 

Also Mrs Robinson was considered well enough by the hospital in Mexico to be discharged after three days.

 

It would appear that she unfortunately suffered a cardiac arrest in the San Francisco hotel.

[richleeds]

To repeat the question I raised in an earlier post.

 

 

 

Why did P & O cancel the family's pre-booked hotel in, and flight from, San Francisco when Mr Robinson, the ill lady's husband, had remained on board the ship to disembark in San Francisco?

 

 

 

Also Mrs Robinson was considered well enough by the hospital in Mexico to be discharged after three days.

 

 

 

It would appear that she unfortunately suffered a cardiac arrest in the San Francisco hotel.

 

 

Who are you addressing your question to?

 

All the armchair detectives on this thread?

 

The answer is none of us know.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[terrierjohn]

Whatever the reasons for P&O offloading this particular passenger, I still feel that they could have offered to let the passenger and her family sign some sort of disclaimer, which would have allowed her to stay on board for the last 3 days until their departure port.

If they had we probably would only be hearing about the wonderful care and superb customer service that P&O had provided to this passenger and her family.

I hope that maybe someone on the P&O management is thinking the same.

[Jill85]

I agree, John. We will never know the full story!

Edited February 9, 2015 by Jill85

[babs135]

Why did the husband stay on board when his sick wife was off-loaded? If it had been me I would have wanted to be with my 'other half', rather than 3 days with no contact. This suggests to me that the lady in question was 'reasonably fit' at the time and that there was no reason to think she would deteriorate and sadly die so quickly.

 

Whatever the reasons, P&O are in a 'no-win' situation. Damned if they did and damned if they didn't.

 

At the end of the day the story ends with the sad death of the lady and I send my condolences to the family at this difficult time. Speculation by the media will not be helping.

[silver surfer 2010]

Whilst it is very sad that the lady died, I do wonder whether it is the 'compensation culture' that is kicking in here, someone got the pictures to the 'Daily Wail' very quickly

[dsrdsrdsr]

Why did the husband stay on board when his sick wife was off-loaded? If it had been me I would have wanted to be with my 'other half', rather than 3 days with no contact. This suggests to me that the lady in question was 'reasonably fit' at the time and that there was no reason to think she would deteriorate and sadly die so quickly.

 

It suggests the family thought she wasn't all that ill. The doctor evidently thought she was ill, the family didn't. Hindsight suggests the doctor was correct, sadly.

[dsrdsrdsr]

Whatever the reasons for P&O offloading this particular passenger, I still feel that they could have offered to let the passenger and her family sign some sort of disclaimer, which would have allowed her to stay on board for the last 3 days until their departure port.

If they had we probably would only be hearing about the wonderful care and superb customer service that P&O had provided to this passenger and her family.

I hope that maybe someone on the P&O management is thinking the same.

 

I would have thought there is no sort of disclaimer suitable for the purpose. A family disclaimer would be worthless unless every single member of the family, both on the holiday and back at home in England, were to sign with full knowledge and consent. The family in Mexico can make no disclaimer on behalf of the family in England.

 

As for the lady herself, I doubt that a disclaimer signed by her would have any legal weight bearing in mind her condition.

 

I doubt that any holiday company could allow anyone to disregard the company's own doctor's advice without laying themselves open to all sorts of potential charges.