Passports not needed

[ivanova]

DCL may not be requiring passports in 2006 but they are STRONGLY urging guests to get them anyway.....

as for the passport issue, in our case the sole custodial parent did not need the absentee father's signature or presence to get her daughter's passport, but I'm not sure what all she had to provide to get around the requirement that both parents be present.

 

[Pooh_Friend#1]

I am cruising September 2006 but am still going to get a passport to be safe. My boyfriend has twin girls and is on good terms with his ex-wife and they both share custody. Does he only need their birth certificates if he is not getting them a passport, or should we have his ex-wife sign something for proof for Disney?

 

[tvguy]

Passports are like travel insurance.

Neither are required.

Both are an expense.

But in both cases, if you need them, you're glad you have them.

In both cases, if you don't need them, you end up wasting your money.

 

[SueEllen]

I must ask you again. When did you last speak with DCL on this issue? I spoke with DCL just today about our reservation and asked them again...do I need passports for our cruise in June? They said no, it is not necessary until Dec. 2006. They are NOT advising that it is necessary to travel in 2006. I just wonder if you have spoken to them in the last week?

I speak with DCL daily (I'm a TA).
As I said, the issue of exactly when you will NEED a passport (by which date) is still up in the air. DCL is still advising when booking these that the government has not issued an exact date and they STRONGLY recommend having the passport for 2006 sailings (to the point where some agents are still advising they will be necessary).

I have said in each of my posts that the government has released a new proposed timeline for this (and provided the actual press release) BUT I want people to also know that DCL can still require the passports for 2006 (and in each post I have said this is always subject to change.) DCL does advise (even now) that you should be prepared to have a passport for any sailing in 2006.

Sue Ellen

 

[musicgirl]

ok, I did not succeed in not posting about this again.

I agree with Joeski71. The govt. just changed the timeline because they felt it was not enough time. Why would they change the date to earlier? Also, the first timeline doesn't exist anymore!!!!! Plus, it was never put on the register to even be official.


Tvguy and SueEllen, I guess I don't know why you are so against not having passports. SueEllen, I can understand that as a TA you want your clients to be informed. But why panic them with, you just never know when they may change it?

SueEllen, you said that the date is still "up in the air" for the passports.
It is very clear that at least until 12-31-06, passports for the areas in concern are NOT needed. If they decide to change the date, I'm putting my money on putting the date off even later rather than sooner.


This should be a positive thread for those not wishing to put out the extra cash for passports. Instead, it has become a heated discussion. Why not just be happy for us? Why not be optimistic? Why are you being negative about this?

No offense, but if I used a TA, I don't think I would rely on what a TA told me over such a big issue. I would not just rely on what I saw on a thread. I would check it out myself.

I have asked that they post the passport site at the beginning and leave it there. If someone wants the info, it will be right there for them to read and for them to decide FOR THEMSELVES if they need a passport. That way the same discussion doesn't get re-hashed.

 

[imomtojd]

Great post, Musicgirl. I'm not going to get my kids' a passport unless the gov't says they need one, and they've made a decision that the earliest they'd require one is Dec. 31, 2006. My seven year old will not need one for years and my older son would be days away for getting a 10yr. one, so I'm not going to waste money getting him one that would only last five years. I'm personally relieved, I didn't want to "waste" two hundred dollars for them unless they were needed. DH and I already have them, though.

Lisa

 

[tvguy]

ok, I did not succeed in not posting about this again.

I agree with Joeski71. The govt. just changed the timeline because they felt it was not enough time. Why would they change the date to earlier? Also, the first timeline doesn't exist anymore!!!!! Plus, it was never put on the register to even be official.


Tvguy and SueEllen, I guess I don't know why you are so against not having passports. SueEllen, I can understand that as a TA you want your clients to be informed. But why panic them with, you just never know when they may change it?

SueEllen, you said that the date is still "up in the air" for the passports.
It is very clear that at least until 12-31-06, passports for the areas in concern are NOT needed. If they decide to change the date, I'm putting my money on putting the date off even later rather than sooner.


This should be a positive thread for those not wishing to put out the extra cash for passports. Instead, it has become a heated discussion. Why not just be happy for us? Why not be optimistic? Why are you being negative about this?

No offense, but if I used a TA, I don't think I would rely on what a TA told me over such a big issue. I would not just rely on what I saw on a thread. I would check it out myself.

I have asked that they post the passport site at the beginning and leave it there. If someone wants the info, it will be right there for them to read and for them to decide FOR THEMSELVES if they need a passport. That way the same discussion doesn't get re-hashed.

Just want folks to have a wonder stress free vacation.
Having had hassles over not having a passport for my son for a trip to Canada, I'm a little gun shy.
Like I posted, you can go without passports, and you can go without travel insurance, and if you don't need them, cool. But if you need them, you have a problem.

 

[SueEllen]

I'm certainly not adamant that anyone get a passport, I'm sorry if you are reading that into my posts.
I was posting the information from the official site and advising that people should remain aware of what Disney is requiring for travel as well in order to make an informed decision as to what to do.

As a TA I do my best to make sure that my clients are aware of the policies and procedures, as well as linking to the passport office's website address to stay on top of their requirements. Their timeline is still a proposed timeline and yes, it could change to a later date, but just as well it could also change to earlier. The old timeline did appear on the site also showing the 12/31/05 date up until this past week.

If you look at my original post I made sure to BOLD the dates that the Dept of Homeland Security is proposing so that everyone could see the update here, and/or go to the official government site (which I linked to.)

I by no means am trying to force anyone to spend extra money if not needed, but instead I am trying to help others make an informed decision as to what to do.

In another discussion about this very thing not so long ago I also said that we have only just recently applied for our passports, and we broke it down into separate times to apply to help save the $$ for each one as we were able. I am aware as anyone else to the expense of doing this, and with my DH having lost his job last December just before Christmas and taking a 50% pay cut (on top of having to now drive 95 miles ONE WAY to work) I certainly know what it's like to have money tight.

My posts were only done to provide accurate information and a link to the passport agency's website for any updates. As I have said all along, the timeline is subject to change, as is Disney's policy on whether or not to require the passports instead of a birth certificate and photo ID.
It is always better to err on the side of caution than to have to spend extra $$ to have to expedite a passport if things change.

Sue Ellen