There are few things in life more decadent and luxurious than a cruise vacation. Unless of course, you are on a Royal Caribbean cruise and your child gets a cold, and then a paranoid crew kicks you and your family off the ship at night in your pajamas at a foreign port where you then have to spend thousands dollars for passports and tickets to get home. It sounds like a nightmare but that’s exactly what happened to this Florida family according to WFTV. Read the details of their misadventure, inside…
Last Monday night, the Cortes family boarded the Majesty of the Seas for what was supposed to be a lavish, 5-night cruise. On Tuesday, the Cortes’ 7-month-old Zoie, started getting ill and the ship’s doctor was dispatched. With symptoms of vomiting and diarrhea, little Zoie was diagnosed with dehydration and the doctor said she needed immediate treatment, but off the ship. According to the family, a security guard gave them 10 minutes to pack their bags and leave the ship. “I asked if my wife could get out of her pajamas and there was no time for that. We had to leave,” said Luis Cortes. The Cortes’ speculate that the doctor suspected Norwalk virus since Zoie exhibited symptoms similar to the virus’.
At 11pm the Cortes’ rapidly disembarked into Nassau and sought treatment at a local emergency room. However, Zoie was diagnosed with a cold, not the Norwalk virus. Additionally, the family said she had seasickness. The Nassau doctor deemed Zoie fit for travel, however the cruise ship had already left. “We had to find our way to the U.S. Embassy. All of this on foot. A family of five in this town we knew nothing about,” said Cortes. The expenses that ensued were to the tune of $3000 for the cost of the emergency room, emergency passports (passports are not required on Caribbean cruises but RC recommends them), and plane tickets back to Florida. Royal Caribbean responded to WFTV saying that they were concerned because the child was so young and didn’t want to take chances. Royal Caribbean is giving the family free vouchers for another trip, but will not reimburse the cost of the passports and tickets “because the family didn’t purchase trip insurance.”
We’re not impressed, Royal Caribbean. It’s difficult to understand why you would have to kick a family off the boat within 10 minutes because of a case of “dehydration.” And now you won’t even pay for the family’s trip back to Florida? We would think that the reimbursement would be a small amount compared to the money you could be losing from any passenger with a slight cough who may now be afraid to board your ships. We understand that Norwalk virus is the bane of cruise ships but your knee-jerk reaction put this family through a boat-load of unnecessary grief. What would have happened if the ship was at sea? Plank time?
Update: According to Fox News, Royal Caribbean has recanted on not reimbursing the Cortes family. Royal Caribbean says, “Despite the company’s strong disagreement with the manner in which the Cortes family’s situation has been recounted in the media, as a gesture of good will, Royal Caribbean is providing the Cortes family with a refund of its cruise fare and reimbursement for its flights home.”
Family Says Cruise Ship Kicked Them Off Boat Because Child Was Sick [WFTV] (Thanks to everyone who sent this in!)
Royal Caribbean International Statement [Fox News]
(Photo: Getty Images)
More From Consumerist
-
Royal Caribbean Passenger Says Crew Wouldn’t Let Her Leave Her Cabin After Daughter Fell Overboard
-
Royal Caribbean Ship Returns To Port Because Floating Around With 108 Sick People On Board Is Not A Vacation
-
Another Carnival Cruise Ship Is In Trouble And Guess What? Toilets Are Overflowing
-
Poop Cruise 2: Passengers Not Pleased After 410 Toilets Stop Working On Carnival Ship
-
Company Behind Bulletproof Clothing For Politicians Now Designing Duds For U.S. Kids
Yeah, I agree…lawsuit time. That is just reprehensible…when I take a trip, I don’t expect to be abandoned out of country left to the mercy of who knows what.
On the other hand…why the hell were they taking a 7 month old on a cruise? Children don’t need to be on cruises, and barely born infants DEFINATELY don’t need to be subjected to the various viruses, pathogens etc you will encounter with so many ppl in small confines. To say nothing of the other passengers’ comfort…do I go on a cruise to relax and enjoy myself, or to listen to infants screaming at my dinner table?
They wanted to have kids, they get to enjoy all the fringe benefits. They need to stop whining.
And, it’s good to know that RC will get rid of sick kids in the name of protecting other passengers. They go to the top of my cruise line list!
@Saboth: I agree with your latter point. Infants don’t belong anywhere that is supposed to be relaxing and vacation oriented. Hell, kids in general don’t belong anywhere that is supposed to be relaxing or vacation oriented.
Is there a cruise line that only allows adults? And by adults I mean over, say, 25?
@SaveMeJeebus: Who cares if you wouldn’t have fun lugging around a seven month old?
Maybe they enjoyed travelling with their child before the whole getting kicked off the boat thing.
Remeber: your personal preferences are not the personal preferences of others.
Just wanted to apologize to the OP for the death of their parents.
They ARE dead, right? That’s why you had to bring a BABY with you? No one to babysit? Obviously, you could AFFORD a babysitter, what with $3000 at your disposal.
Anyway, what you went through totally sucked. It would have been about as bad as being stuck on a boat my vacation being ruined by sick, germy, sticky, screaming kids.
Double post…
@radleyas: Having practiced Fair Housing Law for 13 years now, I think I can say I know what I’m talking about when I tell you that a 40+ development does not have the right to advertise itself as “adult” and keep out kids. The only developments that can legally do that have to be 55+. 40+ won’t cut it.
I for one applaud the cruise line for getting potentially infectious people off the ship. Sickness spreads like wildfire on those ships and is a HUGE issue.
They could have handled how they did it better perhaps. Maybe directing them to a local land based agent who could help them make arrangements?
@unklegwar: Infants don’t belong anywhere that is supposed to be relaxing and vacation oriented. Hell, kids in general don’t belong anywhere that is supposed to be relaxing or vacation oriented.
So, kids just never get to go on vacation? Ever? Oooookay…so I guess all of the family-oriented vacation spots should just close their doors then, huh?
If you want a kid-free cruise, take one on a ship that doesn’t have amenities for children. Then you can gripe about the little monsters running around ruining your vacation. Otherwise, it’s your own damn fault for going somewhere that clearly expects and welcomes children.
@EricaKane:
I agree. North Korea indeed. Good luck Mr. CEO finding a flight on Air Koyro back to America…bru..ha..ha..ha..ha.
@tmccartney: I’m wondering if this bit from the Fair Housing Act info is relevant:
“The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In some circumstances, the Act exempts owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members.”
Looking at the Sun Lakes website, it mentions “country clubs” all over the place, so I’m wondering if it falls under the “private clubs that limit occupancy to members” situation. It looks like a pretty expansive and modern place so I doubt they’d be getting away with something if it was downright illegal. I’m sure they know what they’re doing and if they were violating the FHA, I imagine someone else would have noticed that by now…
@VeteranMilitaryWife:
Have you ever tried to *use* travel insurance? It’s a complete scam. The policies are filled with so many exclusions that they won’t cover 90% of what happens to you. Further, even if you do have coverage, you’ll go through unbelievable red tape before you’ll ever see a penny from the insurance company. Total joke.
@SJActress: You know, I don’t even like or want kids, but that doesn’t mean I think people taking family vacations with babies is a crazy or stupid idea. The baby is part of the family, no? Just because he/she won’t exactly get much out of the views of the rolling sea and the light jazz on the cocktail deck doesn’t mean the parents have no right to bring the baby along.
And I imagine on something as large as a cruise ship, you wouldn’t have too much trouble putting distance between yourself and any offensive child. It’s not like the family is going to trail behind you the whole time holding out a crying poopy baby covered in jam and necrotic tissue. Trust me, a screaming baby is like fingernails on a blackboard to me, but you’re overreacting to say it would ruin your vacation unless you’re being forced to bunk with said baby.
It will be worth every cent to them when the child grows up and they can re-tell the story to him/her, and everyone else, several thousand times.
@Buran: Yes, but my point was that the child was exhibiting the *symptoms* of the Norwalk virus and, had the child actually had the disease, these forums would be screaming about how much Royal Caribbean sucked for not doing something about it when they suspected they could have a problem.
Secondarily, families are totally entitled to vacations, but a seven month old? Really? What’s a seven month old going to get out of a cruise? Wait until the child is older and can, you know, enjoy themselves. It’s like when I took my niece to Disney World a few years ago and saw a family of three: mom, dad, and 3 month old, and I couldn’t help but think “Really? What a waste of money.”
What ever happened to people staying home to bond with their child during infancy rather than going out and doing things the child will have no memory of?
Vomiting and diarrhea are very serious in a child that young, they get rapidly dehydtrated. Infantile Diarhea used to be the biggest killer of children under 1 in this country… and still is around the world.
I don’t blame the cruise line for playing it safe and getting the kid to a hospital where it could receive IV fluids. If the kid continued to be ill and ended up dying of dehydration they’d be seeing a much bigger lawsuit than this is going to turn into.
However, they should have covered the flight back to the USA for the family.
Taking a child that young on a cruise is more objectionable to me on the fact that you are putting the child’s health at risk than potentially disturbing other vacationers.
And here is the Royal Caribbean version of the story… IMHO, judging from some of the actions taken by the complaining family, it’s not hard to decide which version is the most accurate…
[www.foxnews.com]
Sadly, it appears to me that this is a case of using media coverage to bully a big company into paying for the customer’s extremely poor decision making.
@ConsumerAdvocacy1010: Yes! the first “blame-the-victim” post! You win – my contempt.
@thirdbase: Good one!
Worst company in America 2009? That family is so lucky they had the credit card power to secure the passports, tickets, etc. after the fact.
So I’m just curious, what does everyone think of taking a baby on vacation?
And please, don’t sugar coat it.
This surprises me a LOT. I’ve been on Royal Caribbean cruises several times and they’ve always been wonderful. Great service, great experience, great all the way around. This story certainly won’t make me stop cruising with RC, but it does worry me a little. Here’s hoping it was a VERY isolated incident. :-/