Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A ship is no place for a pregnent woman. They can be dangerous no matter how comfort oriented it can be built. The ship I was on in the Navy (USS Samual Gompers) was the size of a cruise ship and people got hurt often when at sea and it was especially hard on the newcomers that had yet to get their sea legs. It's even worse on smaller ships.
Have you been on a cruise? I have, all over the world. Do you know your fit would cause them to call the police? Or if you were on the ship, you'd be off in the next port. Check your cruise documents, its all in there.
Do you know you have to have paid for insurance before hand to cover that life flight of the ship. Depending on the area of the world they are in, the cost could be $50,000 to several hundred thousand dollars. No insurnace, I'm sure the life flight isn't a charities willing to take their helicopters out to sea. to pick up a deadbeat. They aren't a charity.
It’s the family who gets the bill for that, why on earth would the cruise ship be concerned with that or have to do with it?
If she were near term that's one thing but she's still 9 weeks out.
You're right, it would be different. A term infant usually needs nothing in the way of medical care at delivery. A typical 25 week preemie will die IN MINUTES if not placed on a ventilator and given surfactant.
Below 25 weeks, the cruise line will allow a pregnant woman to cruise because there's really nothing much to be done if she goes into premature labor and delivers on the ship. It's just a miscarriage. Even at a hospital with a NICU and neonatologists on staff, such a fetus is usually doomed. The presence or absence of adequate neonatal care simply isn't relevant. At 25 weeks and beyond, it is.
I can't blame the cruise line for not wanting to take on that level of liability. When an older person with iffy health decides to cruise he is risking only his own life. A woman in the latter stages of pregnancy is also risking the life of her fetus - and no, many of them will NOT accept what that means if the worst should happen. And there's no waiver they could sign that would absolutely prevent them from later suing the cruise line if they decided to go and the worst did happen. Go on a cruise, prematurely deliver, then sue the cruise line for the (unavoidable) death of her "precious baby" (which apparently wasn't precious enough to her to warrant altering her travel plans to protect its safety) - that's the scenario the cruise line is understandably wanting to avoid.
A ship is no place for a pregnent woman. They can be dangerous no matter how comfort oriented it can be built. The ship I was on in the Navy (USS Samual Gompers) was the size of a cruise ship and people got hurt often when at sea and it was especially hard on the newcomers that had yet to get their sea legs. It's even worse on smaller ships.
So it’s okay for the elderly, it’s safe for them but not for pregnant women? Pregnant women work often until the day before their due it was a pregnant woman who ran a race in the Olympics the days of oh you’re pregnant you need to sit down and get in bed and not do anything have been over for a long time. It really sounds like you’re talking about the 1960s or 70s where men got to decide where and when pregnant women were seen and what they did and needed to be protected from themselves by force if needed. If this woman’s doctor think she’s OK to go on the cruise that should be all that is needed.
You're right, it would be different. A term infant usually needs nothing in the way of medical care at delivery. A typical 25 week preemie will die IN MINUTES if not placed on a ventilator and given surfactant.
Below 25 weeks, the cruise line will allow a pregnant woman to cruise because there's really nothing much to be done if she goes into premature labor and delivers on the ship. It's just a miscarriage. Even at a hospital with a NICU and neonatologists on staff, such a fetus is usually doomed. The presence or absence of adequate neonatal care simply isn't relevant. At 25 weeks and beyond, it is.
I can't blame the cruise line for not wanting to take on that level of liability. When an older person with iffy health decides to cruise he is risking only his own life. A woman in the latter stages of pregnancy is also risking the life of her fetus - and no, many of them will NOT accept what that means if the worst should happen. And there's no waiver the could sign that would absolutely prevent them from later suing the cruise line if they decided to go and the worst did happen. Go on a cruise, prematurely deliver, then sue the cruise line for the (unavoidable) death of her "precious baby" (which apparently wasn't precious enough to her to warrant altering her travel plans to protect its safety) - that's the scenario the cruise line is understandably wanting to avoid.
An elderly man who has a stroke Well can die within minutes, yet he is allowed to make the choice to take that risk, while the woman is not. Sounds fair!
By the way airlines allow pregnant women to fly practically up to term isn’t it much more dangerous to go into labor while you’re in the air over the ocean with no way to get someone off?
They die or suffer permanent disability, if they can't be medevaced off in a timely fashion.
Quote:
what if an elderly person falls and breaks a hip...
They are kept in bed, immobile, until they can be moved off the ship (which would usually be at the next port).
Quote:
what if someone gets appendicitis?
They get medevaced off the ship ASAP. (if it's not fast enough, guess what? They die.)
Quote:
Cruise ships handle these things all the time.
Cruise ships are not floating hospitals. They are more like floating Urgent Care clinics. What most people don't know is how little care most cruise ships can actually offer someone with a serious health problem.
They die or suffer permanent disability, if they can't be medevaced off in a timely fashion.
They are kept in bed, immobile, until they can be moved off the ship (which would usually be at the next port).
They get medevaced off the ship ASAP. (if it's not fast enough, guess what? They die.)
Cruise ships are not floating hospitals. They are more like floating Urgent Care clinics. What most people don't know is how little care most cruise ships can actually offer someone with a serious health problem.
My point was those people are allowed on the ship, those people are allowed to decide to go and this woman is not allowed the same choice Even nine weeks from full-term, and with a doctors note stating she is fine and healthy enough to take the cruise. Sorry it’s arbitrary and IMO has some ugly undertones. .
An elderly man who has a stroke Well can die within minutes, yet he is allowed to make the choice to take that risk, while the woman is not. Sounds fair!
By the way airlines allow pregnant women to fly practically up to term isn’t it much more dangerous to go into labor while you’re in the air over the ocean with no way to get someone off?
1. That risk is to himself. Not to an unborn viable kid. VIABLE. Anyone who dies "within minutes" of having a stroke was gonna die no matter where he was.
2. Maybe that's a dumb plane policy, but even over open ocean, the plane is likely to get to help a lot faster than a cruise ship out at sea.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
