Weird Document Trend - Parents Bring Birth Certificates for Kids, but just DLs for Adults

[sparks1093]

7 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

And yet, with very few exceptions, the bulk of two entire cruise industry segments (premium and luxury) steadfastly refuse to accept a passenger (on any itinerary) without a passport even though your “reading” says there’s “no problemo.”

So, what? I suspect that it's because very few of the itineraries offered by said lines fall into the closed loop category, so training their staff for to handle all of the different documents that can be presented is a major effort and one that is not worth undertaking for them. Since their passengers are well heeled they lose no business by requiring passports of all passengers. And even if the mainstream lines only allow it because it could affect their bottom line, again, so, what? It's all irrelevant to a passenger making a decision about whether to use an alternative to a passport or not on a closed loop cruise on a mainstream cruise line. It's allowable because it's a legitimate choice, even if you would never, ever be a position to exercise the choice.

 

 

[Flatbush Flyer]

18 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

I suspect that it's because very few of the itineraries offered by said lines fall into the closed loop category,..

 

Your supposition is incorrect. The “bread and butter” of those cruise lines requiring passports includes regularly scheduled “closed loop” itineraries. 
Perhaps the informed decision-making that keeps them afloat trumps the “reading” and limited experience of some occasional passengers who erroneously believe that legitimacy is more important than common sense. One only needs to peruse the daily news to see the fallacy of that belief.

[Charles4515]

37 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

And yet, with very few exceptions, the bulk of two entire cruise industry segments (premium and luxury) steadfastly refuse to accept a passenger (on any itinerary) without a passport even though your “reading” says there’s “no problemo.”

A very small segments of the cruise industry. It is irrelevant. They don’t do many closed loop cruises. 

[sparks1093]

4 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Your supposition is incorrect. The “bread and butter” of those cruise lines requiring passports includes regularly scheduled “closed loop” itineraries. 
Perhaps the informed decision-making that keeps them afloat trumps the “reading” and limited experience of some occasional passengers who erroneously believe that legitimacy is more important than common sense. One only needs to peruse the daily news to see the fallacy of that belief.

Again, it's all irrelevant to someone making the decision to cruise without a passport.

[Charles4515]

4 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Perhaps the informed decision-making that keeps them afloat trumps the “reading” and limited experience of some occasional passengers who erroneously believe that legitimacy is more important than common sense. One only needs to peruse the daily news to see the fallacy of that belief.

That is your opinion not backed by facts. It is legitimate to take some closed loop cruises without a passport, with birth certificate and DL. Whatever reasons Oceana and Regent don’t allow that are irrelevant and we can only guess. The key thing is that whatever cruise people take they need to find out and follow the document requirements.  

[Flatbush Flyer]

 

1 hour ago, sparks1093 said:

…it's all irrelevant…

 

51 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

…It is legitimate…. 

 In nil sapiendo vita iucundissima est.

[sparks1093]

Just now, Flatbush Flyer said:

 

 

 In nil sapiendo vita iucundissima est.

It's been a long time since High School Latin so thank goodness for Google. Not sure why you even care what the hoi polloi do since it doesn't impact you at all. You might have given someone who's been following along some food for thought for them to consider in their decision.

[ldubs]

There are well stated arguments for and against use of passports vs BC/ID documents on closed loop cruises.   After that, it is individual choice.  

[1025cruise]

It is a cruise line's prerogative to require all cruisers to have a passport.

I believe Princess requires everyone to have a passport when traveling with an unrelated minor.

[SoloAlaska]

Passport is like an insurance policy. You may not need it but if you do you’ll be thankful you have it. 
 

I live near the US border and agree if you’re just driving accross and staying near the border it’s no big deal. Canadian ambulances can transfer you to the border if there’s a medical emergency. If however your cruising to Alaska and you have a medical issue and end up in Prince Rupert you will need to fly.

[Charles4515]

2 hours ago, SoloAlaska said:

Passport is like an insurance policy. You may not need it but if you do you’ll be thankful you have it. 
 

I live near the US border and agree if you’re just driving accross and staying near the border it’s no big deal. Canadian ambulances can transfer you to the border if there’s a medical emergency. If however your cruising to Alaska and you have a medical issue and end up in Prince Rupert you will need to fly.

On a round trip out of Seattle with only one Canadian port I can see why some might skip a passport. If there is an emergency they could probably wait until the next port which will be a US port if they don’t have a passport. They might wait anyway even if the passenger has a passport. 

[CruisingAlong4Now]

I am reminded of the recent hullaballoo about the two Florida women who cruised to Mexico without passports, were injured, and were "stuck" in Mexico because they could not fly home.

 

"Although Carnival Cruises does not require passports for some trips, it is strongly encouraged. "

 

Florida couple stranded in Mexican hospital after cruise pit stop takes a horrifying turn - WSVN 7News | Miami News, Weather, Sports | Fort Lauderdale 

[MacMadame]

 

3 minutes ago, CruisingAlong4Now said:

I am reminded of the recent hullaballoo about the two Florida women who cruised to Mexico without passports, were injured, and were "stuck" in Mexico because they could not fly home.

I was just typing that! They definitely didn't get an exception in a few hours though I think their case was complicated by also not having insurance and the hospital wanting payment. Definitely an example of pennywise, pound foolish!

[GeezerCouple]

It obviously wasn't *only* the lack of a passport that caused trouble here!

 

This is also a statement about how travel insurance can really help when needed!

These women may have been among those (we do NOT know this; it's a hypothetical example) who say things like, "We're all healthy, we don't need travel insurance!" or such.

 

And although most travel insurance is of the type where one pays where services are provided, gets receipts, and then submits those receipts to the insurer for reimbursement.

However, many of those insurers (or "at least some"?) will step in to assist when a large payment is *required* before medical care can proceed.  They might arrange to guarantee payment, or they might even wire some of the money to get things started.

 

I remember signs on the wall of the billing office of a hospital while DH was being taken to the ER, and I was escorted to pay...

"We will ONLY accept payment guarantees from the following travel insurers: <name of several insurers that I recognized>."

Fortunately, we travel with several charge cards with high limits.

Rather than waste *any* time about any billing, I simply handed over a nice charge card, and went to be by DH's side.

[He recovered completely.  And I should add that the medical care started in the medical center on the ship.  We were very impressed with the care... a very nice surprise!]

 

GC

[sparks1093]

9 hours ago, CruisingAlong4Now said:

I am reminded of the recent hullaballoo about the two Florida women who cruised to Mexico without passports, were injured, and were "stuck" in Mexico because they could not fly home.

 

"Although Carnival Cruises does not require passports for some trips, it is strongly encouraged. "

 

Florida couple stranded in Mexican hospital after cruise pit stop takes a horrifying turn - WSVN 7News | Miami News, Weather, Sports | Fort Lauderdale 

 

9 hours ago, MacMadame said:

 

I was just typing that! They definitely didn't get an exception in a few hours though I think their case was complicated by also not having insurance and the hospital wanting payment. Definitely an example of pennywise, pound foolish!

Their biggest issue was not being able to pay for the medical care and is definitely a stronger argument for good travel insurance (but as noted even travel insurance may not help in some situations as overseas facilities want the money up front before providing treatment). And I'm sure some will point out that folks who forego a passport may also forego insurance and they are probably right- both decisions are personal ones and sometimes people will make the wrong choice. 

[SoloAlaska]

16 hours ago, Charles4515 said:

On a round trip out of Seattle with only one Canadian port I can see why some might skip a passport. If there is an emergency they could probably wait until the next port which will be a US port if they don’t have a passport. They might wait anyway even if the passenger has a passport. 

Not too long ago there was a story of a gentleman who was ill and they diverted towards Prince Rupert (not a stop on itineraries I know of) because of a medical emergency. If someone is having a heart attack or a stroke they aren’t going to wait till the next day to get to a US port. The situation isn’t common but can and does happen.

[1025cruise]

3 hours ago, SoloAlaska said:

Not too long ago there was a story of a gentleman who was ill and they diverted towards Prince Rupert (not a stop on itineraries I know of) because of a medical emergency. If someone is having a heart attack or a stroke they aren’t going to wait till the next day to get to a US port. The situation isn’t common but can and does happen.

I'd be willing to bet that across all the ships sailing, that there has to be at least 1 medical disembark per week. But even with travel insurance, you will probably need to front the money first and then get reimbursed for the local hospital. 

[SoloAlaska]

1 hour ago, 1025cruise said:

I'd be willing to bet that across all the ships sailing, that there has to be at least 1 medical disembark per week. But even with travel insurance, you will probably need to front the money first and then get reimbursed for the local hospital. 

My Alaska cruise last year we had one to two medical disembark per port pretty much and that was a smaller ship. One of those sadly was a staff who needed to go have emergency surgery.

[ontheweb]

5 hours ago, SoloAlaska said:

My Alaska cruise last year we had one to two medical disembark per port pretty much and that was a smaller ship. One of those sadly was a staff who needed to go have emergency surgery.

Does anyone know if the staff are provided with medical insurance? I'd be willing to bet officers are, but I am wondering about the rest of the crew/=.

[zqvol]

41 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Does anyone know if the staff are provided with medical insurance? I'd be willing to bet officers are, but I am wondering about the rest of the crew/=.

Yes, all crew has medical insurance. 

[ontheweb]

10 hours ago, zqvol said:

Yes, all crew has medical insurance. 

Good, glad to hear that.

[ilikeanswers]

As a non American I am curious why do you have different forms of motor vehicle driver's licence? What purpose does it serve? 

[sparks1093]

4 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

As a non American I am curious why do you have different forms of motor vehicle driver's licence? What purpose does it serve? 

Each license allows the holder to do a different thing, and gives the holder of the license options and each level of license comes with it's own set of documents needed plus it's own cost. Not all states offer choices to the drivers. Congress passed a law (2003 IIRC) called the REAL ID Act that mandated that states issue ID's (including licenses) that had better security features in order to make ID's more consistent from state to state. Anyone not in possession of one of these IDs would not be able to enter property controlled by the Federal government and the most common property frequently entered by citizens are airports, so without a REAL ID in possession someone wouldn't be able to fly. This has not been fully implemented yet because many states have asked for extensions due to extra expenses incurred, etc. etc. etc. All along the overarching concern was that "the people" were not interested in having a "national identity card" that was mandatory to possess.

 

Still with me? One of the requirements of REAL ID is that the applicant needs to provide proof of legal status and for most US citizens that is a birth certificate and this requires one to go into the issuing authority with a bunch of paperwork. So some states allow people to get a non-REAL ID compliant license that simply allows them to drive, but cannot be used to board a plane or enter a Federal building. It is my understanding that most states do charge more for a REAL ID compliant ID because of the extra handling involved. So the basic non-REAL ID license would be license number one, which just gives someone the ability to drive (we will not get into the different classes of licenses issued that allows an operator to drive a commercial truck or the like). Then the states also issue REAL ID compliant IDs, including licenses and these licenses allow someone to drive and to enter property under Federal jurisdiction. 

 

And early on in the process it was determined that travelers, especially travelers who live near a land border, needed an inexpensive way to quickly prove identity and citizenship instead of having to get a passport the State Department developed the passport card and some states (in conjunctions with DHS and State) developed Enhanced Drivers Licenses. These licenses have a machine readable chip in them like a passport does and applicants are subject to the same documentation requirements and background check requirements for someone getting a passport. And just like a passport card an EDL may be used to prove identity and citizenship in one document to cross a land border or for sea ports of entry returning from the Caribbean, Canada, Bermuda or Mexico (cruises). Only 5 states issue these- Vermont, New York, Michigan, Minnesota and Washington state. An EDL is REAL ID compliant and normally costs more than a regular license (I pay $25 extra for mine in Vermont every 4 years).

 

So, there you have it. Three possible licenses that all allow the holder to drive, but each allows the holder to do something more. And yes, as the OP points out confusion reigns because people think that a REAL ID license proves citizenship because they had to provide their birth certificate to obtain it. Unfortunately with choices comes confusion.

 

 

[Charles4515]

7 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

As a non American I am curious why do you have different forms of motor vehicle driver's licence? What purpose does it serve? 

I have a different spin than the previous post. Americans are traditionally opposed to national identity papers. For historical, political and some for religious reasons. Some believe it is authoritarian. That is one reason our social security cards can’t be used as ID. After 9/11 many lawmakers believed a secure form of ID was needed for US citizens but would not have been able to establish a national ID card for the reasons I stated so they came up with Real ID as a stealth way to do it. Real ID has been resisted and delayed for the above mentioned reasons as it had to be implemented by each state and some did nothing for years so to this day it has not gone into effect although it looks like it might actually happen in 2025. A Real ID is not mandatory to drive in all states so right there it is two classes of license. Real ID is domestic, it has nothing to do with crossing borders. It is not recognized as meaning anything outside the US. The EDL is like a passport combined with a DL although can’t fly internationally with it as ID. It is meant to facilitate land an sea border crossings. It exists basically for trade, like for truck drivers etc. although any resident of the five states that issue them can pay extra for one. Some Canadian provinces used to issue them too but they stopped. Only a limited number of countries in the western hemisphere recognize it. So the Real ID is for secure identity and the EDL has a passport type function. Since Real ID, EDL, Passport Cards and Passport Books could require Birth Certificates that causes confusion. 

Edited yesterday at 12:32 PM by Charles4515

[sparks1093]

7 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

I have a different spin than the previous post. Americans are traditionally opposed to national identity papers. For historical, political and some for religious reasons. Some believe it is authoritarian. That is one reason our social security cards can’t be used as ID. After 9/11 many lawmakers believed a secure form of ID was needed for US citizens but would not have been able to establish a national ID card for the reasons I stated so they came up with Real ID as a stealth way to do it. Real ID has been resisted and delayed for the above mentioned reasons as it had to be implemented by each state and some did nothing for years so to this day it has not gone into effect although it looks like it might actually happen in 2025. A Real ID is not mandatory to drive in all states so right there it is two classes of license. Real ID is domestic, it has nothing to do with crossing borders. It is not recognized as meaning anything outside the US. The EDL is like a passport combined with a DL although can’t fly internationally with it as ID. It is meant to facilitate land an sea border crossings. It exists basically for trade, like for truck drivers etc. although any resident of the five states that issue them can pay extra for one. Some Canadian provinces used to issue them too but they stopped. Only a limited number of countries in the western hemisphere recognize it. So the Real ID is for secure identity and the EDL has a passport type function. 

I'm not really seeing a different spin here at all other than maybe REAL ID being a stealth way to have a national identity card. I personally don't think there is anything "stealth" about it, it is a way to standardize ID's across the country and has always been stated as such. As for our Canadian friends the last I read is that one province stopped offering EDLs because there was little demand for them but AFAIK the other four still issue them. As for recognition of the EDL only Cuba and Martinique do not accept it for cruisers (but then they don't accept passport cards for cruisers, either).