Baby born on the Independence!

[C-Hill]

Why 3 ambulances???

Did mother and baby take so much space?? [emoji3]

 

1 ambulance for mom (accompanied by "dad type" and 3-ish year old child)

 

1 ambulance for baby in incubator (accompanied by about 6-8 assorted family who climbed in another van brought out to the pier)

 

1 ambulance for a guy, maybe 18-20 years old (accompanied by a "mom" type)

young guy looked like perhaps a leg injury, was sitting up chatting.

[Cindy]

I love cruising -- we all do, or we wouldn't be here. That said, I can't imagine risking my life and my unborn child's life to take a cruise in late pregnancy. From all accounts, this woman appeared to be fairly advanced in her pregnancy.

 

I can't help but think this is at least in part a result of the rule change after the woman without a doctor's note was denied boarding last year. The cruise hating media took off with the story, and now we have an honor system. Can you imagine the outcry and the headlines if mother or baby had died?:(

 

Sometimes, rules are there for a good reason.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

Glad to see more people posting to speak about the disregard for safety and lack of common sense by the parents in this case.

 

I got roasted by another poster who chose to insult me with these same views (how sad)...but clearly...the event was the result of a highly risky decision by selfish and/or thoughtless people. Luckily, the child appears to be OK.

Edited September 7, 2015 by CRUISEFAN0001

[iheartbda]

Back to topic....still wondering how this happened. Did mom not know she was pregnant? The rule about traveling after 23 weeks has not changed has it? i am all for baby moons but only in the relative safety of the U.S. if you are a U.S. Citizen. If you travel anywhere after 24 weeks you must accept the risk that you may deliver early there. It happens all the time even after seeing and getting your doctors ok to travel.

As a Nicu nurse it terrifies me to think of a woman delivering even a 28 weeker on a cruise ship. On a plane you can quickly land and get the baby help but on a cruise ship if could be many hours. Since they have the no travel rule I am guessing they do not stock expensive equipment and supplies to care for someone so small. Without proper equipment even knowing what to do doesn't help.

 

IF the mother was not truthful, no one will ever know because she won't admit to something so questionable. A couple people posted that they saw her onboard and she looked quite pregnant.

 

Someone posted earlier that no formal ok has to be given by a doctor and it's now on the honor system. YIKES, I could see how that might possibly come back to bite them in the backside big time.

[Biker19]

While the birth was at sea, the paper work will be done at the Florida hospital and I assume would be a US citizen regardless of parents citizenship. Anyone care to guess when RCI will reinstate the previous pregnancy rule?

[SMN73]

From the website...

 

http://www.royalcaribbean.com/allaboutcruising/accessibleseas/otherNeeds.do

 

My daughter couldn't go on our May 2015 cruise because she would have entered her 24th week 3 days into the cruise. It was not honor system. They went by the rules in the link I posted and they required the "fit to travel" docs. Her OB was willing to sign a release and RC refused.

 

 

ETA... I'm now the proud 1st time grandma to they most perfect 6 day old little girl alive. :-)

Edited September 7, 2015 by SMN73

[Langley Cruisers]

Come on. You think that the mother let on she was pregnant? Not everyone that is looks it

 

Please don't "Come on..." me. I replied very early in this thread and just sincerely and honestly said what most people were thinking anyway. Gee. :(

[Isaboo]

I sure hope they took out travel insurance!

[mollyeilis]

The cruise line requires doctors note / clearance to sail. How did they get around this? Honestly it is a scary situation.

 

Royal does NOT require it.

 

 

From the website...

 

http://www.royalcaribbean.com/allaboutcruising/accessibleseas/otherNeeds.do

 

My daughter couldn't go on our May 2015 cruise because she would have entered her 24th week 3 days into the cruise. It was not honor system. They went by the rules in the link I posted and they required the "fit to travel" docs. Her OB was willing to sign a release and RC refused.

 

 

ETA... I'm now the proud 1st time grandma to they most perfect 6 day old little girl alive. :-)

 

 

I received the email below on May 1 of this year. You were misinformed about requiring the note BUT of course by timing she wouldn't have been allowed on if being truthful. (though most people don't know, to the day, the date of conception, so missing it by 3 days seems a bit silly to me depending on family history)

 

 

We no longer require our pregnant guests to submit a fit to travel letter from the doctor. Since this is a new change made to our pregnancy policy it has not been updated on our website as yet, our team is currently working on this change. We are still requiring our guests to be under the 24 weeks of pregnancy in order to sail. Our guests cannot be entering, or have entered, the 24th week of pregnancy at the time during the sailing or cruise tour.

 

[With my family (most pregnancies go long) and DH's family we likely wouldn't want to go on a cruise even at 22 weeks. DS was forced out (thanks, stupid American insurance rules governing the health "care" people) at 42 weeks 3 days (we DID know conception) and had signs of prematurity. DH himself was born at 44 weeks (dad was on leave and a train woke them up...they definitely knew their dates) and was under 9 lbs. We can't even imagine what would happen if a baby we had was born at 24 weeks...there's no way it would survive since our families seem to require well over 40 weeks to be OK.]

[SMN73]

If it was a new policy, and the website wasnt changed, I can see why in April they would have given us the info they did. It was fine, I like to err on the side of caution, I would have worried doing our route with her anyway. So we modified the vacation where she spent several days in Puerto Rico with us.

 

However, the fact that it's September, and that info is still on the website, is unacceptable. They really should get their act together and make a rule, stick to it, inform their people, and change their info.

Edited September 7, 2015 by SMN73

[PattyW]

I sailed right on the cusp of the deadline when I was pregnant with my 3rd in 2009 and I wouldn't have wanted anyone judging me for that decision. It was just one of those things that was perfectly timed - three generation cruise, cousins had coodinating spring breaks - we had the airfare to San Juan long before I knew I was pregnant. I would have been devastated if I hadn't been able to cruise. I think I made it by 3 days.

 

Of course, the baby was not only not born on the cruise - he wasn't born until 9 days after his due date.

 

I looked for a good picture to show how pregnant I looked, but I must have been feeling huge because 80% of the pictures of me are from the waist up. There are, of course, none from the side. This one is pretty good -

[DaMom]

Here we were thinking right up until we got into our stateroom on Sunday that the itinerary was going to be changed because of Tropical Storm Erika - so many people here, including myself, had called RCCL and been told verbally "yes, your new itinerary is Labadee, Cayman, Cozumel" - We were clinging to the fact that they didn't update things on the website so we really didn't know where we were going until we saw that first Cruise Compass!

 

Then the surprise and excitement of the baby being born - as a mom of a 34 week/1 day preemie (19 years ago) the thought of giving birth on a cruise ship terrifies me, but somehow everything worked out. SO much credit due to the medical staff on the Independence! I didn't see the pregnant mom, but it surely sounds like she misrepresented how pregnant she was from the visual reports some of you are giving. Once we get past the WHAT WERE THEY THINKING (I was secretly hoping it was one of those "i didn't know I was pregnant" stories from TLC) - I'm delighted for the baby that he's OK. And hope the parents got "scared straight" and won't make any more dumb*** decisions with their kid's life moving forward.

 

And how about that thunder and lightening the night we were in San Juan? Was anyone else with the about 150 of us taking shelter in the dockside CVS? We're from California so that seemed like a mighty big storm to us!

 

All in all a great cruise!

[skiiergirl]

The baby will get something special, like Pinnacle status the rest of their life . Or what ever,.

 

Is this a first for a cruise line?

 

Years ago before RC even had the 24 week rule....we were on board a Panama Canal transit (so 14/15 night) and we were "NET +1" in accounting language. We had an older gentleman die but we had a lady give birth to TWINS!

[conandrob240]

RCCL does not allow mothers to sail who are in or will be in their 24th week of pregnancy. Tat means this baby had to be at leas 12 week premature. That must have been pretty scary for the family!

 

Much more likely that the mother lied.

[Cruzin-K]

The OP said the family was from Utah, and yet so many are using this thread as a way to stir up controversy about birthright citizenship. Unreal :rolleyes:

 

I had heard about this on another thread (although not a thread started because of this issue) and was wondering if there were any more details about how far along the Mom was, just out of curiosity, not to blame the Mom for what happened. Some of you seem to think she deliberately took a cruise and induced her own labor so someone could start a Mom-bashing thread on Cruise Critic. :(

 

Even if she was a couple weeks further along, I'm sure she didn't think for a minute that she'd be going into labor 12 weeks, or even say 9 weeks early. That is scary for any Mom. One of my friends had a baby born at around the 6 month mark, born dead :( I think the focus here should be on the fact that there is a baby out there fighting to survive and be glad that the ship was close enough to San Juan to get there in time to get the baby to a hospital before something worse happened.

[BND]

The OP said the family was from Utah, and yet so many are using this thread as a way to stir up controversy about birthright citizenship. Unreal :rolleyes:

 

I had heard about this on another thread (although not a thread started because of this issue) and was wondering if there were any more details about how far along the Mom was, just out of curiosity, not to blame the Mom for what happened. Some of you seem to think she deliberately took a cruise and induced her own labor so someone could start a Mom-bashing thread on Cruise Critic. :(

 

Even if she was a couple weeks further along, I'm sure she didn't think for a minute that she'd be going into labor 12 weeks, or even say 9 weeks early. That is scary for any Mom. One of my friends had a baby born at around the 6 month mark, born dead :( I think the focus here should be on the fact that there is a baby out there fighting to survive and be glad that the ship was close enough to San Juan to get there in time to get the baby to a hospital before something worse happened.

 

I think you're too defensive and missing the point.

 

BTW, I think most of us know someone who lost a baby prematurely, including my mother who lost two. No one thinks they're going to go into labor 12 weeks early, but honestly, it sounds from those that saw her that she was more pregnant than that.

 

Also, for the citizenship thing, someone asked a legitimate question considering the baby was born at sea. It's almost as if you know the mother because you're taking this extremely personally.

Edited September 7, 2015 by BND

[WrittenOnYourHeart]

I sailed right on the cusp of the deadline when I was pregnant with my 3rd in 2009 and I wouldn't have wanted anyone judging me for that decision. It was just one of those things that was perfectly timed - three generation cruise, cousins had coodinating spring breaks - we had the airfare to San Juan long before I knew I was pregnant. I would have been devastated if I hadn't been able to cruise. I think I made it by 3 days.

 

Of course, the baby was not only not born on the cruise - he wasn't born until 9 days after his due date.

 

I looked for a good picture to show how pregnant I looked, but I must have been feeling huge because 80% of the pictures of me are from the waist up. There are, of course, none from the side. This one is pretty good -

 

I'm glad that everything worked out for you. BUT I suspect you'd be singing a very different song if things had gone differently. No one PLANS to deliver a preemie. The guidelines are set based on what the cruiseline has decided is safe based on their available medical equipment and staff.

[Trekker954]

Here is the scoop IF the mother wasn't U.S. The baby born at sea would be medically paroled into San Juan where they got off(meaning the baby would NOT have citizenship), but would assume citizenship of the parents.

[dcgrumpy]

I think you're too defensive and missing the point.

 

BTW, I think most of us know someone who lost a baby prematurely, including my mother who lost two. No one thinks they're going to go into labor 12 weeks early, but honestly, it sounds from those that saw her that she was more pregnant than that.

 

Also, for the citizenship thing, someone asked a legitimate question considering the baby was born at sea. It's almost as if you know the mother because you're taking this extremely personally.

 

It's hard to tell though. I carried huge with all 3 of my kids. From 5 months on I had people saying "any day now" and I wanted to kill them. :rolleyes:

 

But the fact that they were already flown to FL makes me think she was more than 24 weeks. I don't recall seeing the family beforehand. If I did, she didn't stand out to me. I was hoping the captain would tell us the weight of the baby.

 

And I was wondering what happens with trip insurance if she was over 24 weeks. Do they still cover a claim if she took a trip she shouldn't have?

[Cruzin-K]

I think you're too defensive and missing the point.

 

BTW, I think most of us know someone who lost a baby prematurely, including my mother who lost two. No one thinks they're going to go into labor 12 weeks early, but honestly, it sounds from those that saw her that she was more pregnant than that.

 

Also, for the citizenship thing, someone asked a legitimate question considering the baby was born at sea. It's almost as if you know the mother.

 

Actually, so many people are bashing her, it's like they think they know her, how far along she was, and that she's nothing but a big fat liar who would jeopardize her baby for a cruise. The fact is that (so far) nobody on here knows her but many sure are judging her based on nothing but rumors.

 

I just like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Until more facts are presented, maybe from someone who actually does know her, why not be kind?

[Sherri914]

Actually, so many people are bashing her, it's like they think they know her, how far along she was, and that she's nothing but a big fat liar who would jeopardize her baby for a cruise. The fact is that (so far) nobody on here knows her but many sure are judging her based on nothing but rumors.

 

 

 

I just like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Until more facts are presented, maybe from someone who actually does know her, why not be kind?

 

 

I don't think people are judging based on rumors so much as observations. People reported her appearing very far along. People reported the baby was doing fine (as reported by the Captain). Those seem to indicate that the baby was much farther along in gestation than the cutoff of 24 weeks. A baby born prematurely at or before 24 weeks of gestation would not be doing "fine". But none of us know the details for sure. So I understand what you're saying. I think this occurrence is such a rarity though that it is going to stir up discussion like this with people tossing opinions from all sides. As long as they're not disparaging, I enjoy the discussion.

[Sherri914]

One thing I just thought of... Insurance. Let's say she was, in fact, beyond the 24 week gestation when she boarded. The medical bills for her treatment on the ship and that of the baby will no doubt be high. If she's found to have lied and cruised against Royal's rules, I wonder if her travel insurance (if they did have insurance) will pay for those medical expenses aboard. Just a thought.

[Isaboo]

And I was wondering what happens with trip insurance if she was over 24 weeks. Do they still cover a claim if she took a trip she shouldn't have?

 

 

That's what I was wondering!

[JessyCruises]

One thing I just thought of... Insurance. Let's say she was, in fact, beyond the 24 week gestation when she boarded. The medical bills for her treatment on the ship and that of the baby will no doubt be high. If she's found to have lied and cruised against Royal's rules, I wonder if her travel insurance (if they did have insurance) will pay for those medical expenses aboard. Just a thought.

 

I don't think the insurance would cover the baby's medical treatment, regardless of whether she lied. There was a story in Canada a few months ago where a family was on vacation in Hawaii and the mother went into premature labour. The babies treatments were not covered by their travel insurance.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/jennifer-huculak-kimmel-s-1m-baby-bill-denied-by-saskatchewan-blue-cross-1.2847097

[CaribSailor]

At the end of the day who's business is it anyway? Not anyone's on CC that's for sure... Bunch of drama queens here. SMH. So many people have nothing better to do then speculate, I feel like I'm reading yahoo news.