Another possible drowning - Disney Fantasy ******UPDATE

Discussion in 'Community Board' started by goofyintoronto, Mar 30, 2013.

  1. mom2rtk

    mom2rtk DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,866
    How about this.

    If a given person does not like to assume any degree of risk......... they not let their own kids swim during the hours there is no lifeguard on duty. No construction of fences needed, no extra expense required.

    Nobody is going to make anyone let their kids swim without a lifeguard present. People are entitled to regulate the degree of risk they are comfortable with in their lives. But what I don't like is when they impose that on others.

    I guess in an odd way, that makes it sort of similar to the recent 40 page discussion about older kids in the women's bathroom. As I recall, the bottom line on that thread was do whatever you want to mitigate risk in your own life, but quit imposing it on others (in that case by taking the older boy into the stall so others didn't have to be uncomfortable).
     
  2. Avatar

    Google AdSense Guest Advertisement


    to hide this advert.
  3. Tiger926

    Tiger926 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2000
    Messages:
    8,084
    Late to this thread as busy Easter weekend, but just read through much of it.

    As has been mentioned countless times, the pool areas are chaotic disasters waiting to happen: swimming, sliding, water play areas, recreational activities, parties, shows, Funnelvision, food stations and bartenders selling drinks. Where do lifeguards fit in? Nowhere.

    Not only are the pools ridiculously small, but the areas are so crowded with a million other activities. We lasted seconds at the pools on the Fantasy, and we had had enough.

    There absolutely is lack of parental supervision, crowd capacity and safety issues galore, so we removed our children. Actually, they took one look at the chaos and removed themselves. I went in pool with my very tall child and she said that she couldn't hear herself think due to the noise and craziness around her. Not a safe water situation at all.

    With the set up the way it is, it is a huge amount of risk, which I am frankly surprised Disney allows, considering age restrictions and height restrictions at parks.

    The entire pool area for us was a disaster waiting to happen and we didn't feel comfortable with the pools at all. The smallness and chaos of them drove us away and will continue to keep us away on every Disney Cruise, with their current set-up.

    I hope the boy is doing better today, as is his family.

    Tiger

    Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards
     
  4. North of Mouse

    North of Mouse DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    6,842
    You are getting two situations confused. This is the story about the boy drowning at the POP pool, not about the near drowning on the Fantasy.
     
  5. TwingleMum

    TwingleMum DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Messages:
    6,358
    This is certainly tragic and I hope the boy gets better but to blame Disney is convenient. The parents are responsible for their child. Bottom line. If the parents weren't there they shoulder responsibility. I can't tell you how many times I see unattended children at the WDW pools. It dangerous and unfair. We are frequent WDW visitors and love swimming. I can't tell you how many times a lifeguard I know will be annoyed and point out a kid with no parent. The parents use them as babysitters. Lifeguards are not babysitters!! You wouldn't give a 9 yr old your car keys. They aren't old enough. Children aren't old enough to swim without an adult. I don't care how great your kid swims -- no adult no swim. Simple as that. I have an IGP. My 4 boys have been swimming since they are 2. We swim every weekend in the winter at the club. They are fish. They are not allowed to swim without my DH or I. They are not allowed near the pool without us. Lets face it u tell them wait 4 u and they promise but 1 push and horseplay leads to another and someone mysteriously gets in the pool. So no adult no swim rule ends tragedies. I investigate drownings and every year my stomach knots when I hear a 3 yr old in the bottom of pool call. Those families lives have been changed in an instant. there are no words to say. 90% of the time I hear "I took my eye off them for a minute" Heartbreaking. Yes ,pools are fun and kids love them but they are also dangerous with out proper parental supervision. Disney is not their parent and cannot be expected to be. Parents need to be responsible for their own children.
    sorry about smiley on iPad & hit submit & smiley at same time.
     
  6. FlyingDumbo

    FlyingDumbo DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,232

    And these same people will suddenly pay attention to the "pool closed" sign? Highly unlikely. Not Disney's fault if people ignore the signs.
     
  7. Mkrop

    Mkrop <font color=coral>I just cant go on demand<br><fon

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    10,778
    I am sorry if I wasnt clear....

    my opinion is if the pool is open than lifegurads need to be on duty. If they do not want to have lifeguards than the pool is closed. If a guest is found in the pool after hours, and this is a rule set by the hotel, they can either fine the guest, or ask them to leave. This could be patroled by security or hotel personnel that walk around anyway.

    question away about my opinion....I am ok with it.
     
  8. ZephyrHawk

    ZephyrHawk Confirmed Disneyphile

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    5,046
    This.

    I grew up on an island. Every kid I knew had swimming lessons at age 3. Every kid I knew had their boating license by age 13. Our parents trusted us to be as safe as we could be, but they knew they couldn't protect us from everything. I knew of 2 kids who drowned. One was a toddler who died in just several inches of water while his mother and grandmother were less than 10 feet away. Another kid fell through the ice while skating with his family. Never once did I ever hear of even a drowning scare happening when kids were off swimming or boating by themselves (which was very common). Having prepared and trained children does not prevent tragedy. Being there to watch your kid like a hawk does not prevent tragedy. Tragedy is tragic for a reason. These things just make tragedy somewhat less likely.
     
  9. Colleen27

    Colleen27 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    17,183
    The cost of an employee is much higher than the actual wage paid- you're not taking into account the employer's contribution to social security or other costs like workman's comp, unemployment insurance, health insurance, etc.

    I do agree, however, that it isn't as cost-prohibitive on the cruise line as it is at WDW. They very well might be able to ensure 24/7 coverage at the family pools with minimal additional costs to be passed along to passengers.
     
  10. Tiger926

    Tiger926 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2000
    Messages:
    8,084
    Honestly, since a Disney cruise costs way more than most other cruises, I am sure Disney can afford the lifeguards, at no additional cost to guests.

    If it is about money for DCL, then that doesn't compute with me. If it's about liability, as being discussed, or because they don't have to, that is way more believable to me.

    Tiger

    Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards
     
  11. sam_gordon

    sam_gordon DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    10,770
    No company is going to bring in an added charge and not turn it around to their customers.
     
  12. sam_gordon

    sam_gordon DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    10,770
    You know, it's these kinds of reactions that have resulted in "no tolerance" policies that everyone hates. One tragedy, that may not have been preventable in the first place, and everyone's screaming "we have to keep this from happening again!" I'm sorry people, but sometimes accidents happen.

    How many people swim on the Fantasy (to say nothing about other pools) with no life guards and don't have a problem? But because there was ONE (ok, two if you include the drowning at POP) accident, now we need to have all kinds of added rules. :furious:
     
  13. Tiger926

    Tiger926 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2000
    Messages:
    8,084
    Why should it be an added cost? It should already be in place with a cruise that caters to kids. Especially one that charges a premium.

    Disney Resorts are highly vigilant with lifeguards at resorts and water parks, so why different on cruise?

    Another question: how are other cruises for pool lifeguards? We didn't swim much on our NCL cruise before kids, so we can't remember?

    Tiger

    Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards
     
  14. sam_gordon

    sam_gordon DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    10,770
    Um, it would be an added cost because you'll need to add the personnel to be lifeguards? Just because you think it should already be in place, you know it's not. So you KNOW the cruise line would have to add people to do it.
     
  15. Tiger926

    Tiger926 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2000
    Messages:
    8,084
    Well isn't that an obvious answer! You missed the point.

    I don't believe that at all. They can dip into the areas of wastage on the ship and fund it that way: food, decorations, etc...

    You also didn't answer my question regarding the difference between resorts and cruise in the lifeguard department?

    Tiger

    Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards
     
  16. NoSoup4U

    NoSoup4U I am Art Vandelay

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2013
    Messages:
    382
    I agree.
    Parents need to watch their own children. Theyre your kids afterall. Having a lifeguard present is great in case someone needs CPR thou.
     
  17. sam_gordon

    sam_gordon DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    10,770
    Of course they could cut other areas to support the increased cost. But I don't see that happening.

    And I didn't answer your question because I don't have an answer. If I had to guess, maybe it has something to do with pool size?
     
  18. Planogirl

    Planogirl I feel the nerd in me stirring

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2000
    Messages:
    42,970
    Someone previously asked about non-Disney hotels and many of them not ever having lifeguards and I saw no response to that. I don't recall any of the budget hotels having lifeguards and yet these tragic drownings seem to be very rare.

    I agree that Disney doesn't need to have lifeguards at all times. Maybe close the pools to younger kids at a certain time and close the pools altogether when it's real late but lifeguards 24/7 at every pool is overkill IMO.
     
  19. Tiger926

    Tiger926 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2000
    Messages:
    8,084
    Of course it won't happen, as Disney loves their profit margins. If they aren't required to, then I agree that they aren't going to provide it, unless the lawyers advise otherwise.

    I also have wondered why they don't run the cruise pools like resort pools, with certain hours that lifeguards are in attendance?

    Tiger

    Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards
     
  20. luvmy3

    luvmy3 <font color=green>When I drink I find its easier t

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Messages:
    20,052
    :thumbsup2 Especially when every child in that pool has a parent or guardian that should be acting as their lifeguard.
     
  21. Colleen27

    Colleen27 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    17,183
    :thumbsup2

    As tragic as both these cases are, they only illustrate how rare problems are. Disney has swim-at-your-own-risk policies at most of their pools most of the time, with 25K+ rooms on property and average occupancy in the 85-90%. Some very rough math, based on weeklong stays and 2 guests per room, translates that into almost 2.5 million guests per year (and obviously accurate numbers would be higher). But the incident at Pop was the first I've heard of a drowning at an on-site resort. Googling turned up one other case, in 1987. That's a more than acceptable safety record by any objective standard, regardless of emotional "Any accident is too many" rhetoric.

    The cruise line has a similar track record - fleet capacity of 13000, so if you assume weeklong cruises for ease of estimating, annual guest capacity of almost 700,000. And yet, this is the only incident I could find any record of regarding a drowning or near drowning onboard. It isn't as though there's a epidemic of unsafe swimming conditions or frequent problems that would justify a total overhaul of policies that both guests and the company seem satisfied with.
     

Share This Page