Mackenzie Click-Mickelson
Chugging along the path of life
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2015
Who are you to determine what is the cruise and what isn't a cruise? You've narrowly defined something excluding all other things like food, entertainment games, clubs, drinks, pools, slides, and more. None of that is the "cruise" either. Your fare may include xyz but doesn't say you're guaranteed buffets, pools working, shows running, etc. But of course everyone includes that when they go on a cruise.But that would not be true. Tenders, port excursions, certain activities (rock climbing, water slides, etc.) are not “the cruise” but rather optional parts of a cruise. The ship CAN accommodate wheelchairs with accessible staterooms, dining rooms, theaters, lounges, etc. Denying boarding the cruise due to inaccessibility of tenders or port excursions or a few activities would be discrimination. The cruise websites are fairly clear as to what is or is not accessible; the passenger can make an informed decision if they feel cruising is a vacation they wish to take. It’s crappy enough for someone to know they can’t participate in everything. I can’t believe someone thinks denying boarding to all wheelchairs would even be any level of acceptable.
The PP spoke about the usage of lifeboats as tenders. That is a whole 'nother thing. If a cruise ship is using lifeboats as tenders, lifeboats that are meant to carry all passengers to safety, to say they cannot accommodate passengers in wheelchairs would go against their ability to carry them on the ship..safely. If that's the case that would spell disaster in epic levels if a situation occurred.
Some cruise ships have specified tenders that are handicap accessible which may or may not always be used, that's understandable and a passenger could be in a position where that is the reason. You're correct that cruise lines have discussions about mobility and tendering. But tendering and tendering in a lifeboat are not the same. And that's what the PP spoke about. I believe cruise ships decide they would rather not deal with the "hassle" of a passenger in a wheelchair, it doesn't mean I agree that should be the case.
I didn't say I would like that to happen, but from a passenger standpoint you've paid for a cruise and then told you're arbitrarily not able to go ashore because a lifeboat is being used as a tender, in the real world how many passengers do you think would be okay with that and not demand compensation or in today's world shout it from the rooftops, as they should in this case.I’m not sure where this happened or when or the circumstances. My guess is that there may be more to the story and blanket statements like this are in very poor taste.
From a passenger standpoint if you knew you wanted to go ashore but were barred because you were in a wheelchair and the cruise ship knew this, knew that they were not going to accommodate you because they would be using a lifeboat and they "can't accommodate" it would you be okay with that?
No I'm not advocating that a cruise company do it, but I am saying if they were just going to deny you no matter what could be better to not allow you to cruise. Of course if a passenger is notified in advance that personally they would not be allowed ashore in a wheelchair in a lifeboat used as a tender that would be in the passengers hands, but to find out when you're on the ship? That's so cruel IMO. I suspect you read my comment in a different manner to which I was speaking about. If you're talking about being denied based on being blind well that's something that is in the news so searching for it can be done. It's not a blanket statement, it has happened.
____________
In any case this has gone down a rabbit whole completely different from the thread so apologies but don't take my lack of response negatively, just moving on here