These articles crack me up. The comments following them are even funnier.
First, the family was booked BEFORE the minimum age policy change so they were "grandfathered" in accordingly. If Disney had changed their policy and refused the already booked family passage then we'd be reading an article about how wrong Disney is for not allowing them to sail and how Disney should make it up to them.
Further, the family was not debarked due to the new minimum age policy. They were debarked for the infant's safety, the baby's medical needs. If the baby had stayed onboard and subsequently passed away (dehydration can take little babies FAST) we'd be reading about how Disney killed a baby.
This occured during one of the THE busiest travel times of the year. A holiday sailing. Who's to say the room the family was given wasn't all that could be had? Also, the level of accommodations described was the opinion of the family. Who's to say their level of "acceptable" isn't the Waldorf? In that case, there's pretty much nothing comparable in Nassau.
The family cites they deserved a $1k/night hotel room because that's what they paid for their cruise. How many people were booked into the stateroom to generate the $1k/night price tag? Another factor is that this was a holiday sailing. They cost way more than other sailings. Comparably, I sailed on the same ship (Disney Dream) in a 1-bedroom suite on a 4-night cruise that visited the exact same ports this past September. I paid more along the lines of $675/night.
The ship was on an itinerary that ports in Nassau and Castaway Cay (also located in the Bahamas). Where else would have been suitable for Disney to deliver this family for medical care? Should they have kept a sick infant onboard longer to deliver it to a port even further away? How about tying up a USCG medivac when there might've been a more immediate, pressing emergency? Turned around the ship and returned to the port of embarkation? I'd like to know exactly what the better options were.
I cruise frequently, almost exclusively with Disney. The health & wellbeing of my family is still my responsibility even when I'm onboard one of Disney's ships. Before I ever start my vacation it is MY job, not Disney's, to prepare for whatever might come up during our trip. This is why I buy travel insurance. If an emergency arrises, illness or accident, it's my job to get my family the best care I can and manage the financial repercussions of the unfortunate occurance. Travel insurance will pay for medical care & medical evacuation. It pays for lodging, transportation, and other expenses pertaining to trip interruption due to illness or injury. They even will reimburse me for the rest of the trip I didn't get to enjoy due to the interruption. The travel insurance company issues documents and cards for you to carry with you that have a 24/7 hotline for you to call if/when anything goes awry. They provide assistance with making all necessary arrangements. I buy the travel insurance because it's my responsibility. If anything were to happen Disney's offers of assistance would be appreciated but I promise you I'd be well ahead of them handling whatever is before me. Again, MY job. NOT Disney's job.
I do think if they said their shoreside would handle the arrangements, that should've happened. This the first time I've ever heard otherwise. BUT, if Disney had done a bang-up job of taking care of things the family wouldn't have any need to ask Disney to "make it right", would they?
A fix for this situation would be for Disney to provide travel insurance automatically to every passenger and increase the cruise fares to pay for it. Imagine THAT article, how Disney *forces* it's guests to pay for something they may not even want. ((rolling eyes))
The fact that Disney offered to assist this family at all is above and beyond. If they picked up any expense or reimbursed then I say they did more than plenty. Read the cruise contract. It's not their job. The baby got sick. The ship's doctor did what he felt was the best thing for the baby. It's not Disney's obligation. Disney didn't make that baby sick.
People argue that Disney should never have let the baby onboard if they couldn't handle any health concerns that came up with the baby. People say that this fact makes Disney responsible for this family. Really? The ships have fantastic medical facilities but there ARE things they are NOT equipped to handle with guests of EVERY age. So according to this arguement Disney shouldn't allow ANYONE to board their ship since something may come up that the medical facility can't handle? Or, Disney is suddenly responsible to care for the medical needs of every passenger & their travel party including travel interruption because they allowed them passage? Really? That's laughable.
Also, consider what you are actually reading. You are reading 1 side of a story as retold thru the media. If the story wasn't made to be emotional nobody would read it. Disney hasn't & won't comment with their side of the story due to privacy.
Of course the family wants Disney to "make it right". That's a lot easier than looking at each other and asking "what could we have done differently". I hate that this family had this happen to them. I understand the gravity of their situation cruising with a sick loved one to create memories before time runs out. But, really, even if Disney had put these people up in the MJ suite at Atlantis then medivac'd them to Miami in a private jet, the trip would still have been interrupted and THAT would've been the memories of the trip. Disney cannot fix that the baby got sick and the trip was interrupted. Even if at this point Disney gave this family a free cruise in the Walt suite, it wouldn't change what happened. It wouldn't really make up for it. Would we read about THAT in the media? Not likely.
Thank you
