Sick Child-Familythrown off ship (merged)

[maddea20]

Too bad for the family because it's obvious this doctor did not know what he was doing. He misdiagnosed the child and the whole family had to suffer because of it. Because of this reason RC should refund there hospital and airfare bills, sorry.

[nrdsb4]

Too bad for the family because it's obvious this doctor did not know what he was doing. He misdiagnosed the child and the whole family had to suffer because of it. Because of this reason RC should refund there hospital and airfare bills, sorry.

 

You're talking about the ship doctor apparently. Sorry, it is not OBVIOUS that the doctor "did not know what he was doing" nor that he misdiagnosed the child.

[glgolfer]

One thing I don't believe has been mentioned (and I could have easily missed it) is RCI has a rep in every port. I would bet the rep's name, address and contact number was given to the family when they got off the ship. The rep is there for situations just like this. If RCI did not give this information to the family, that is the only thing I would fault them for.

 

Hard way to learn that a passport and travel insurence is essential.

[madforcruising]

One thing I don't believe has been mentioned (and I could have easily missed it) is RCI has a rep in every port. I would bet the rep's name, address and contact number was given to the family when they got off the ship. The rep is there for situations just like this. If RCI did not give this information to the family, that is the only thing I would fault them for.

 

Hard way to learn that a passport and travel insurence is essential.

 

This information is available to each and every cruiser as it´s printed in the daily compass.

[madforcruising]

Too bad for the family because it's obvious this doctor did not know what he was doing. He misdiagnosed the child and the whole family had to suffer because of it. Because of this reason RC should refund there hospital and airfare bills, sorry.

 

 

You must have read some additional story as from the story posted in the OP it´s not obvious to me.:rolleyes:

[maddea20]

You must have read some additional story as from the story posted in the OP it´s not obvious to me.:rolleyes:

 

uhm ok?

[Cruising89143]

Too bad for the family because it's obvious this doctor did not know what he was doing. He misdiagnosed the child and the whole family had to suffer because of it. Because of this reason RC should refund there hospital and airfare bills, sorry.

 

No, if the doctor on board felt that the child needed medical attention that the ship could not give then he/she was within their right to do so. It's obvious that the family felt that the child was sick enough to take to the doctor. The bottom line here while sad, is that the family did not have travel insurance to handle this emergency.

[dkal95]

You're talking about the ship doctor apparently. Sorry, it is not OBVIOUS that the doctor "did not know what he was doing" nor that he misdiagnosed the child.

 

Agreed.

[cs]

I beg to differ. Our youngest daughter had both diarrhea and vomiting with a common cold. The excess mucus caused both. However you could see the mucus in both (sorry for the detail!), it irritates the stomach and can cause one or both of the symptoms to appear.

 

Nevertheless the ship's doctor could not be sure of the diagnosis and with such a young child it was better to err on the side of caution. It COULD have been something more serious in which case they would have been praising the cruiseline instead of criticizing them. Hey-ho! :rolleyes:

 

Well then I stand corrected. I was under the impression that the mucus would be digested by then. You learn something new every day!

[cruisenfever]

On our recent b2b on Splendour..........on the second part of the b2b we were in Recife, Brazil. We had Norovirus on the first part of the b2b which originated in Valparaiso, Chile with approx. 50 people being diagnosed.....so no chances were being taken on the second cruise since after Recife we had 5 days crossing the Atlantic.

 

By order from the Captain a couple was put off the ship luggage and all in Recife because either the husband or wife was diagnosed and they refused to be quarantined in their cabin. If one partner is diagnosed then both are quarantined for a minimum of 48 hours and their SeaPasses are blocked.

 

I would say that one should always have travel insurance especially when traveling with an infant.

[negc]

Too bad for the family because it's obvious this doctor did not know what he was doing. He misdiagnosed the child and the whole family had to suffer because of it. Because of this reason RC should refund there hospital and airfare bills, sorry.

And from a much greater distance from the scene of the situation and based on your reading of a brief account of the incident, you were obviously able to reach the conclusion that the doctor misdiagnosed the child. Perhaps if they had been able to consult you before taking this action, the problem would have been averted. Nice to know that there are people who are so sure of themselves that they can second-guess people actually on the scene and hand out opinions so easily. Excuse some of us who aren't as ready to assess blame without having more access to the evidence and who don't have the necessary medical background to realize what to you is so obvious.:rolleyes:

[RoyalCruiser2007]

In my legal opinion, RCCL should compensate the family for the hospital bills and the flights in addition to the cruise credit, but NOT for the passports.

 

Had the ship doctor correctly diagnosed the condition, they would have avoided the hospital bills and flights.

 

However traveling to ANY foreign country without a passport is a bad decision. It is the only factor here that the family had direct control over and therefore should be held liable for that avoidable expense.

[cruisin from florida]

They should not have gone to the ships doctor and then the ER at all. They should have logged on to Cruise Critic, where medical experts would have been able to accurately diagnose and treat the illness without the inconvenience of actually laying eyes on the patient, or even, for that matter, speaking with the parents. :-)

 

21 years of parenting, (and counting) and I have learned that STUFF HAPPENS. I'm going to cut the family a break, because with a 7 month old, they just had one of their first lessons in that fact. Unfortunately for them, it was an expensive lesson. Most life lessons that make an lasting impression are. I'm also going to cut them a break, with regards to their unhappiness with RCCL, because when you are stressed out and have just had your vacation ruined, you are not always at your most fair, balanced, and rational in your thinking.

 

Sorry the family had a very bad vacation experience. Glad the baby is fine.

[H82seaUgo]

The family was not "kicked off the ship because their child was sick" They were told to take the child to the hospital for care that the ship's doctor couldn't provide.

 

That's exactly how I read it. Imagine being trapped like rats had the child gone into convulsions or worse due to this illness.

 

Good gravy Marie. :eek:

[nrdsb4]

In my legal opinion, RCCL should compensate the family for the hospital bills and the flights in addition to the cruise credit, but NOT for the passports.

 

Had the ship doctor correctly diagnosed the condition, they would have avoided the hospital bills and flights.

 

However traveling to ANY foreign country without a passport is a bad decision. It is the only factor here that the family had direct control over and therefore should be held liable for that avoidable expense.

 

REPEAT: You do not know that the ship doctor misdiagnosed the condition. You do not have access to medical records, you do not know what assessments were made, you do not know the child's symptoms, vital signs, etc. None of us reading this short article would be able to conclude which doctor was correct. None of us could say that the ship doctor made the wrong choice by sending the child on for further evaluation and treatment. We don't know what assessments were actually made at the hospital. If you are in the legal profession, you would know that you cannot make medical diagnoses, nor are you able to decide when a misdiagnosis has been made. You would need a medical expert to decide that, and even the most brilliant doctor in the world would need FAR more information than what was presented in that short article to discern that a misdiagnosis had been made.:rolleyes:

[nrdsb4]

They should not have gone to the ships doctor and then the ER at all. They should have logged on to Cruise Critic, where medical experts would have been able to accurately diagnose and treat the illness without the inconvenience of actually laying eyes on the patient, or even, for that matter, speaking with the parents. :-)

 

 

Very well said.

[iheartbda]

In my legal opinion, RCCL should compensate the family for the hospital bills and the flights in addition to the cruise credit, but NOT for the passports.

 

Had the ship doctor correctly diagnosed the condition, they would have avoided the hospital bills and flights.

 

However traveling to ANY foreign country without a passport is a bad decision. It is the only factor here that the family had direct control over and therefore should be held liable for that avoidable expense.

 

How do you know that the ship doctor did not diagnose the condition correctly? Isn't it possible that the ER doctor was not correct?

[FL_Cruiser64]

In my legal opinion, RCCL should compensate the family for the hospital bills and the flights in addition to the cruise credit, but NOT for the passports.

 

Had the ship doctor correctly diagnosed the condition, they would have avoided the hospital bills and flights.

 

However traveling to ANY foreign country without a passport is a bad decision. It is the only factor here that the family had direct control over and therefore should be held liable for that avoidable expense.

 

So, not having insurance is not their responsibility?

[jlp20]

…shocking…The family told Eyewitness News… the cruise line kicked them off the ship late at night and abandoned them in the Bahamas when their 7-month-old child became sick…The Cortes family says their Royal Caribbean cruise was a living hell….they were kicked off the boat…."Everyone was crying and pleading…wouldn't throw us of the boat…7-month-old child…was throwing up and had diarrhea. A doctor on the ship said she was dehydrated and had to be treated in a hospital. The family said a security guard gave them 10 minutes to pack their bags and get off the boat. It was 11 o'clock at night…"I asked if my wife could get out of their pajamas and there was no time for that. We had to leave," Luis Cortes said…the Cortes family was stuck in the Bahamas with no passports to get home….Cortes family spent more than $3,000 on their disastrous vacation and they want a refund...Royal Caribbean …but they will not reimburse them for the passports and plane tickets because they didn't pay for trip insurance.

 

 

I find this “story” very short on FACTS, but loaded with adverbs.

You take a child to a ship doctor who tells you to get the child to a hospital. Somehow, instead of doing what you are instructed to do, you return to your cabin and go to bed.

What is the ship’s staff to do with a family that appears to be totally irresponsible?

As posted before, infants have no place on a cruise ship, just for the potential of medical problems.

[Mark_K]

In my legal opinion, RCCL should compensate the family for the hospital bills and the flights in addition to the cruise credit, but NOT for the passports.

 

Had the ship doctor correctly diagnosed the condition, they would have avoided the hospital bills and flights.

 

However traveling to ANY foreign country without a passport is a bad decision. It is the only factor here that the family had direct control over and therefore should be held liable for that avoidable expense.

Only if the presenting symptoms were inconsistent with his diagnosis. If not, the doctor took a prudent course of action given the circumstances.

[RoyalCruiser2007]

REPEAT: You do not know that the ship doctor misdiagnosed the condition. You do not have access to medical records, you do not know what assessments were made, you do not know the child's symptoms, vital signs, etc. None of us reading this short article would be able to conclude which doctor was correct. None of us could say that the ship doctor made the wrong choice by sending the child on for further evaluation and treatment. We don't know what assessments were actually made at the hospital. If you are in the legal profession, you would know that you cannot make medical diagnoses, nor are you able to decide when a misdiagnosis has been made. You would need a medical expert to decide that, and even the most brilliant doctor in the world would need FAR more information than what was presented in that short article to discern that a misdiagnosis had been made.:rolleyes:

 

Obviously this is assuming that there was indeed a misdiagnosis. My bad for not having mentioned that previously. My assessment is based solely on the facts presented in the article.

 

If the ship's doctor made a correct diagnosis and the hospital was the one who misdiagnosed the condition, then RCCL would have zero liability and the credit for the cruise would be a sign of RCCL going above and beyond as travel insurance is generally responsible when such situations occur.

 

Regarding the post about them not having travel insurance. If RCCL's doctor did indeed misdiagnose the condition, RCCL should be held responsible. Travel insurance or not, RCCL must take responsibility for the doctors they employ or contract.

 

If the family did have travel insurance, this could have been a tricky situation as well. The travel insurance provider could have come back and declared that had RCCL's doctor made a correct diagnosis, the medical and flight expenses would not have occurred, thus making RCCL responsible. Insurance companies always look for a way to defend themselves against being liable, and this is a clear situation where the insurance company had a ground to stand on.

 

It all goes back to the liability factor:

 

1. If RCCL's doctor was incorrect = RCCL is responsible
    
   
2. If RCCL's doctor was correct = family (or travel insurance) is responsible
   

 

It would be very difficult at this point to prove which doctor was right or wrong. The only thing the family can do at this point is accept the RCCL credit and just take this as an expensive learning experience.

[sas80]

Has anyone read this article yet

 

Family Says Cruise Ship Kicked Them Off Boat Because Child Was Sick

 

 

http://www.wftv.com/news/15998021/detail.html

 

 

 

 

I love RCCL but if this happened as the family told it... that's not good:mad:

 

CuriousCat

 

A) RCCL didn't want a child to possibly get incredibly ill or, god forbid, die on board and have to be held accountable for letting that "passenger" cruise.

B) We never had trip insurance either until we had kids. Now we purchase it right before final payment.

[Arizona Laura]

In my legal opinion, RCCL should compensate the family for the hospital bills and the flights in addition to the cruise credit, but NOT for the passports.

 

Had the ship doctor correctly diagnosed the condition, they would have avoided the hospital bills and flights.

 

However traveling to ANY foreign country without a passport is a bad decision. It is the only factor here that the family had direct control over and therefore should be held liable for that avoidable expense.

 

On what grounds should RCCL be responsible for reimbursing this family? What misdiagnosis? It is hard to misdiagnose vomiting and diarrhea if the parents report the history. Children especially that young with V&D easily dehydrate. We don't even know if the child was febrile. The ship dr would be negligent not to consider worsening dehydration with that young a child. He obviously did not want to gamble with the condition of that child deteriorating on the ship where more intensive medical intervention would not be available. I have respect for the ship dr for sticking to his decision considering the family did not want to leave the ship.

Doctors make medical decisions everyday that consider what could happen to a patient or to rule out a certain diagnosis that may land up not being the case. For example look at all the patient's admitted to the hospital for rule out MIs (heart attacks) and are discharged with a GI diagnosis.

The ship doctor had this child's welfare as his main concern. Obviously the family made the choice to take the child to the ship's dr in the first place so they had to have some initial concerns. I would guess they thought the ship dr would prescribe some medication and they would be on their merry way.

No way I am going to side with the family on this one. If the child became worse on the ship they would be criticizing the ship doctor for not sending the child to the hospital while in port.

If you cruise with children without travel insurance you make the conscious decision to take the risk. Obviously the family does not want to endure the consequences.

I thought RCCL was generous offering the family cruise credit. The ship dr did not misdiagnose a condition that led to a bad outcome for this child so no case. He referred this child to a hospital ER..nothing wrong with that. Happens everyday.

Laura

[abridalmaven]

The Bahamas is the first stop, colds that include vomiting does not happen overnight. That baby must have been fusing before that, so I see the parents as negligent for overlooking it until it became a big issue. I will even bet the baby was sick before they got on the ship.And yes, I have children and now grandchildren.

[fungirl28]

The Bahamas is the first stop, colds that include vomiting does not happen overnight. That baby must have been fusing before that, so I see the parents as negligent for overlooking it until it became a big issue. I will even bet the baby was sick before they got on the ship.And yes, I have children and now grandchildren.

 

I was thinking the same thing.