Rescue at sea for sick baby

New Posts

  • #441
  • #442
maedlamsmom said:
When my husband, daughter, and I moved cross country, we lived for several months in an extended stay hotel. We had moved from a large house, where my daughter had her own room, because we believed, as a family, that doing so would make our lives better in the long run.
Click to expand...

rsbm/bbm; They didn't choose to sail unprepared, with no ocean experience, and no second able crewman on an unsafe boat to better their lives. They chose to sail becuase Dad wanted do- and Mom went along with it. The kids had no choice. Comparing apples to oranges, imo.
 
  • #443
JMO
I had heard about the rescue when it happend and just spent the past 2 hours reading lots of their blogs.

My initial impression of these 2 adults are they are very selfish people to force their very young children to go on that dangerous voyage. Its one thing if the kids would have been older and wanted to go but at that very early age they had no choice in the matter and it just seems very selfish to me.

Oh, and what really got me convinced they were selfish was when she talked about giving away her dog that she had for 2 years to be on the boat. The way she casually indicated the dog had to go just made me sick. What else (or who else) would she just "give away" if it doesnt fit their lifestyle.

Im flabbergasted and disgusted by them. All JMO of course.
 
  • #444
momrids6 said:
rsbm/bbm; They didn't choose to sail unprepared, with no ocean experience, and no second able crewman on an unsafe boat to better their lives. They chose to sail becuase Dad wanted do- and Mom went along with it. The kids had no choice. Comparing apples to oranges, imo.
Click to expand...

Transcript is here: http://m.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/525/transcript

"Eric is an experienced sailor with a Coast Guard Master's License. It takes 360 days on the water to get that, and it means that he can captain a commercial vessel, which he has done." - Ira Glass


"We reached somebody from the American Boat and Yacht Council, which writes the safety guidelines for these kinds of boats, and he confirmed that there are in fact thousands of families living on boats, tooling around the world with children of all ages. And he said that what the Kaufmans did was not unusual at all. In fact, he said, however it may sound to people who do not sail, crossing an ocean on a sailboat is routine. He said it was on the adventurous side of routine, but it was routine." - Ira Glass


"Oh yes. In fact three other boats did the Pacific crossing this year. The youngest baby was four months old. And in fact, our daughter was the oldest baby. The one-year-old, she was the oldest. The rest were all younger." - Charlotte Kaufman


As to the betterment of their lives... Yes, based on the parents' stated (on her blog several times) philosophy, they believed a life lived together, on the ocean, traveling, with very few materialistic belongings, was a life they wanted to provide for their children. They believed (and maybe still do) that what they were doing was the best thing for their family. They planned, researched, charted, and thought they were making the safest choices within their philosophy. According to several reports I read, Lyra was NOT sick immediately prior to leaving and in fact had gotten a clean bill of health from a doctor before they set sail. They made a choice to give up the only life and home they knew, for their daughters' health and safety. I saw no where was it stated that "dad wanted to and mom just went along". At one point in her very honest blog, she did say she had moments of doubt because it was difficult, but they lived on and off aboard that boat for eight years. I highly doubt it was all due to a subservient woman and overbearing husband. Neither of them strike me as fitting those roles, in my opinion.

Look, I am not saying I think they are perfect people or parents. I don't know them. But, I do feel like the bashing I was seeing on this thread was unfair and unwarranted. It sounds like they took some (what they felt were) calculated risks, and it failed. Neither child was seriously hurt, injured, or traumatized. The youngest child suffered what sounds like a bad ear infection. There is no evidence that she wouldn't have had the same issue on dry land.
 
  • #445
gitana1 said:
I'm pretty good at separating emotion from fact, even when the facts cause emotion in me. It's my job. So here are some problems with this couple that point to extreme negligence. These came from the Rebel Heart blog posts, that I copied from other sailors (who had compiled them):

1. Do not depart offshore if your spouse isn't into it. It isn't fair, he/she most likely she will hate it and if something bad happens you will never live it down and you will feel horrible.
2. Do not depart if your vessel isn't ready. There are no parts stores offshore. The leaks on Rebel Heart that occurred when the engine started were likely from a cracked heat exchanger. If you can't afford to ensure functioning of important equipment you can't afford to make your family dependent on those systems.
3. Don't wash dirty diapers in the galley sink. You might get very sick.
4. The Interweb is your friend. If you have a health issue, or if your child has a health issue, learn everything you possibly can before departing. You might just find out that the illness that made your child sick has a probability to recur, as a quick Google search will reveal is the case with salmonella.
5. If you have a known health issue, do take the heaviest duty drugs that can help with the condition you can finangle from your doctor. You may save someone's life with them without resorting to the US Navy.
6. Some equipment is essential to safe cruising. Preventers, spinnaker poles, self steering, etc. are essential and you should have them. Green bamboo is not a reliable spinnaker pole, and just as a side note, when it breaks it throws very sharp splinters in all directions, never mind punching a hole in your drifter.
7. Energy dependence on a single source is not a good idea. Either be ready and prepared for no energy at all, or have a backup genset.
8. Carry extra fuel if you are going to be dependent on an engine.
9. If the safety of your family is important to you, at the first sign of a problem, start heading for a destination that can provide assistance. You can always turn around if it is a false emergency.
10. If you have a very small child understand that they are light and will fly around the cabin if it gets really rough. Containment of their little bodies is very important.
11. If you like the idea of blue water, pick your first leg to be something other than the longest land to land distance on the planet. Good time to shake things down.
12. If your spouse is not prepared to manage the vessel all by herself if you fall off, break a leg, have a heart attack or jump off the boat clutching the ship's clock, then you being very irresponsible. Take the time to train her so she doesn't have the fear of something happening to you adding to whatever else she doesn't like about cruising.
13. Only step off your boat when you have to step up into a life raft, which you have to carry, and which has to be inspected and which you and your wife should know how to deploy because you have practiced.

From another sailor, similarly:
1. Don't leave with sick kids on medication
2. Have some prior offshore experience
3. Know how you and your spouse will handle stressful situations
4. Have some prior foul weather experience...
5. Know how to repair one's equipment and have the stuff onboard to do so when the time comes.
6. Bring jerry cans of extra fuel and water.
7. Take sea sick medication before you get sick, not.... 4 days later.
8. Purchase a genuine aluminum whisker pole... not scavenged bamboo.
9. Don't have a set timetable in order to meet unrealistic personal goals.

From the above, other sailor's comments and the blog posts themselves I have gleaned that:
1. Husband cut up the primary fuel tank and reduced the capacity of fuel for some reason and made other alterations to the boat that could've comprised it. He also lacked the equipment to reduce risk of an event such as the one that occurred or to deal with emergencies.
2. They claimed the baby was "cleared" for travel but they may not be telling the truth and/or are exaggerating what the doctor stated and/or weren't sufficiently prepared for a recurrence of the problem.
3. They did not have efficient/proper sanitation on the boat.
4. The boat was prone to taking on water.
5. Wife could not sail the boat really. But, according to their blog posts, the boat needed to be manned by someone or a watch kept, 24 hours per day. How is that possible with two children, only one person who can sail and only two adults total? When do they sleep? And what if the husband died or became incapacitated? How would the wife have gotten the kids and herself to safety?
6. The wife hated it and did not have sea legs. She complained non-stop. She was prone to seasickness. It was brutal for her.
7. They lived on the boat in a marina. The bulk of their cruising/sailing experience was not in the open ocean. They actually had very little experience in the open ocean.
8. They jimmy rigged safety measures for the kids. This is detailed on the blog. They didn't pre-plan how to secure two small children in rough seas and had to improvise when it occurred and their kids were being flung all over the place.

To me, the above shows that these people were too inexperienced, ill equipped and unprepared for such a trip. From other comments I've read all over the place, the husband had set unrealistic goals for this trip and that's why they did what they did with what they had- ego.

That's fine for two adults who can choose for themselves. But when they take babies along, that's negligence.
Click to expand...


Worth the read ^^^^^




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #446
smh/////
 
  • #447
sfbaynancydrew said:
I guess I'm in the minority on this one as I think that studio apartment is inspired. To me, the girls look extremely well cared for, happy and very loved. The closet thing is weird, but I get the impression that this is a temporary home in their life's journey and therefore they'll either be moving on before the girls get so big that their "bedroom" is ridiculous or they'll upgrade bedroom conditions.

I do find the bloggers to be sanctimonious about their lifestyle, but then again, so are a lot of the commenters here. :P

Seriously, with all of the abuse/neglect of children, I'm just not seeing the problems. Our first world luxuries are not a foregone conclusion to everyone and different lifestyles don't bother me at all. I'm sure this place looks like a palace to some families in Japan!

C'mon you guys...listen to how you're judging every little thing this family does. JMO!
Click to expand...

:applause: :applause: :applause:
 
  • #448
MyBelle said:
I agree. It's also a safety issue. But then, these are the same parents who literally strapped their infant to her bed in their boat.

JMO
Click to expand...

yes, straps are helpful when in rough weather to keep from being thrown to the floor, sort of like you have to wear your seatbelt on planes when there's turbulence

if you noticed, there are other straps for the adults
 
  • #449
maedlamsmom said:
Transcript is here: http://m.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/525/transcript
respectfully snipped by me for space, my bold

Look, I am not saying I think they are perfect people or parents. I don't know them. But, I do feel like the bashing I was seeing on this thread was unfair and unwarranted. It sounds like they took some (what they felt were) calculated risks, and it failed. Neither child was seriously hurt, injured, or traumatized. The youngest child suffered what sounds like a bad ear infection. There is no evidence that she wouldn't have had the same issue on dry land.
Click to expand...

I'd like to explore your statement regarding "calculated risks".

When the term "calculated risks" was coined during WWII, it referred to tacticians and strategists determining the number of bombers that might be lost when taking out an enemy target, and then determining whether the sacrifice of men and machines was worth the risk. Was the chance of success worth the chance of failure? (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/calculated+risk) Obviously, over time the reference has broadened, but the idea was, I think, to analyze the potential sources of danger and to then eliminate or offset as many of those dangers as possible in order to lessen the risk and reduce the possibility of death and destruction of pilots and planes. In this case, and this is just my speculation, rushing to travel the ocean without having essential equipment and materials on board seems less a calculated risk and more just a hopeful guess.

If I understand the term as it applies in this situation, the ultimate risk is the death by exposure and starvation or drowning or being bitten by marine life for EK's baby who can't walk or talk; his three year old who doesn't understand the concept of danger; his wife who suffers from mal-de-mer, who does not hold certification to repair or navigate or sail the Rebel Heart; and, himself, a man who holds the basic certification to sail his boat and who is responsible for the safety and health of his crew (himself) and his passengers (his baby, his toddler, his wife). The reward, as I understand it, is that the dad gets the adventure of circling the globe on his own boat, the mother gets to see the world, and the children will get to look at the pictures when they are grown up enough to understand. IMO, EK believed that the chances of a successful circumnavigation outweighed the chances of losing his boat and the lives of his family. Once the decision was made, he and his wife made detailed preparations to, from their point of view, minimize the risks.

It's at this point that things become a bit more questionable.

One of the many risks taken by EK, IMO, was his decision not to sail as part of a flotilla with other seagoing families who planned to cruise the same area. Privately cruising the ocean means that you set your own timetable, so, the family could have waited until other sailors were ready to depart. The Rebel Heart would then have been travelling in the company of people who would be near and aware enough to able to help in case of emergencies. This may not have been possible,but, in any case, EK chose to go ahead in relative isolation. Magnifying that risk was another risk, IMO. That was EK's decision not to hire a crew member who would be on board to help with repairs, take over control of the Rebel Heart so EK could rest, help with navigation, help in emergency situations, be available in case EK or his wife got sick, and be another pair of eyes on the two little ones.

Apparently having a sketchy routine maintenance schedule of the boat and of its emergency equipment was another risk that EK seemed to have no problem taking. Surely, if EK was keeping the Rebel Heart in ocean readiness he would have noticed that one of his sails was in such poor condition that it would disintegrate, that he needed to fix problems with his mainsail, that his craft was taking on water and needed repair, that he had no backup rudder and no electric pump on board. In retrospect, it seems like pretty basic stuff to ensure some element of safety.

In addition, EK and CK were willing to risks with the emotional well being of their little daughters. They took the chance that the little ones would not be affected by leaving the people in their extended family, no longer having space to run and play, or being deprived of the companionship of other children.

IMO, one of the most egregious of the Kaufmans' risks was their belief that they could wash dirty diapers in a sink used to prepare food. I find it difficult to understand why the parents thought such a practice would have no negative consequences for their children. (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/1-year-old-rescued-at-sea-recovering-well-aunt-says/) or for CK when, in March, both baby Lyra and CK had been diagnosed as testing positive for salmonella. (http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...t-with-Sick-Baby-254056951.html#ixzz35MQ2V7Tu)

Yet another calculated risk taken by EK was that of attempting to make an oceanic journey with two passengers who were likely still coping with the effects of salmonella poisoning. The family says that a Mexican doctor cleared the baby to travel on the boat and apparently prescribed antibiotics for her which the parents could take with them on their adventure. (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lyra-kaufman-sick-toddler-rescued-from-rebel-heart-back-in-san-diego/) This action by their doctor seems a little curious to me since, in some cases, it can take months for bowels to return to normal following a bout of salmonella poisoning (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/salmonella/basics/symptoms/con-20029017) While sources seem to agree that most otherwise healthy adults can recover from salmonella poisoning without treatment, they also say that such recovery is not the case for several groups. One such category is that of infants. Babies and toddlers may be more at risk for serious complications such as dehydration, bacteremia (meningitis, endocarditis,osteomyelitis) , reactive arthritis, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and blood infection. (Salmonellosis; - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://www.about-salmonella.com/salmonella_complications/#.U6aXwyiYntU; http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/salmonella/basics/risk-factors/con-20029017; http://www.marlerblog.com/case-news...ndrome-ibs-and-reiters-syndrome/#.U6aZwyiYntU) However, according to these source, only rarely does such poisoning end in death.

As well, the Mayo Clinic advises that some factors can increase the risk of being exposed to salmonella including: international travel and recent use of antibiotics. Two big red flags in this case. Therefore, it seems to me that it's possible that Lyra could have been even more susceptible to infections than might otherwise have been the case. I would have expected both EK and CK to be more aware of the health issues involved. They could easily have googled that information and adjusted their plans accordingly. So, they were willing to take the risk that in spite of these warnings, their little daughter would be fine. They took the risk that they were protected by the medicine prescribed by the Mexican doctor, which I can understand, but were without a backup medication in case the first medicine proved to be inadequate. The Kaufmans were very, very lucky that when their communications system on board the Rebel Heart stopped working,their satellite phone was able to get such a fast response.

Side note: I don't think you're correct about the baby's illness. I hope that one of the verified medical professionals will weigh in about this because you could be right. It's been reported that Lyra's symptoms included vomiting, fever, diarrhea, and a rash that covered most of her body. Further, Lyra had not been helped by the antibiotics her parents had brought from Mexico. However, after the rescue, Lyra responded quickly to the navy's medication for the salmonella-like symptoms. (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lyra-kaufman-sick-toddler-rescued-from-rebel-heart-back-in-san-diego/)

Although you may be right and Lyra would be as likely to get salmonella on land as on sea, I tend to disagree somewhat with this statement too. I would hope that, if the family was on land, it would be easier for the adults in the family to practice proper hygiene. It's less likely that they would wash dirty diapers in the kitchen sink thereby making salmonella poisoning much, much less likely.

The type of salmonella most commonly associated with infections in humans is called nontyphoidal salmonella. It is carried by chickens, cows, and reptiles such as turtles, lizards, and iguanas.

Another, rarer form of salmonella, typhoidal salmonella (typhoid fever), is carried only by humans and is usually transmitted through direct contact with the fecal matter of an infected person. This kind of salmonella infection can lead to high fever, abdominal pain, headache, malaise, lethargy, skin rash, constipation, and delirium. It occurs primarily in developing countries without appropriate systems for handling human waste.
Click to expand...
(http://kidshealth.org/parent/infections/stomach/salmonellosis.html)

In contrast to the symptoms associated by the presence of salmonella poisoning, the symptoms of a "bad ear infection" might include: painful chewing, difficulty swallowing, difficulty sleeping, unpleasant odour from the ear, diarrhea or vomiting, tugging of the ear, rubbing of the ear. A little overlap, but I think that Lyra's symptoms seem to more indicate salmonella poisoning than an ear infection. JMO, but any ear problems should be looked at to determine what the actual cause of pain is. Maybe the medical pros can add to this. I know not all infections lead to permanent hearing loss, but, IIRC, some can lead to temporary hearing loss until medical intervention takes place. (http://kidshealth.org/parent/infections/ear/ears_hearing.html)

Yet another risk taken by EK and CK was their willingness to take a chance that the Rebel Heart could withstand whatever weather would occur during the years of their trip. In his research, EK and CK must have learned that storms and high waves were a possibility on the ocean. And yet, there was no equipment or plan for the family to use as protection. I believe that it's only due to the skill and bravery of the U.S. Coast Guard,National Park Service, Defense Department and Federal Emergency Management Agency that we were reading about a rescue at sea and not the drowning of two adults who took a calculated risk with their two children.

{Rescuers} said poor visibility, winds of 10 knots and rough seas kept them from sending a rescue boat to the Kaufmans for hours on Sunday. When they did reach the family's sailboat, 5- to 8-foot waves forced them to offload one person at a time. The effort took two hours....
The sailors said the Rebel Heart had enough fuel for 10- to 11 hours of sailing, but that every time the Kaufmans tried to turn on the engine, the boat would take on water. They said the four California Air National Guard members who parachuted 1,500 feet into the heavy surf to stabilize Lyra got seasick. The parajumpers, who spent three nights on the sailboat, and the Kaufmans were soaking wet when a Navy rescue boat reached them Sunday.
Click to expand...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/09/hospitalized-baby-rebel-heart-debate_n_5118093.html

I am not a sailor, and cannot speak at all about the problems and joys of working and living on the ocean. It certainly seems very romantic on some levels. However, living on an island for nearly twenty years has given me an appreciation of the houseboat and seagoing lifestyles adopted by some families. It's not for everyone, but those families who enjoy it rightly point out the benefits of their choices for their children, many of whom have developed a truly global sense of citizenship and play an active part in their community. Those families also spend a considerable amount of time, money and energy in developing their sailing skills and upgrading their qualifications, learning new repair techniques,maintaining their crafts, buying up to date safety equipment, and having backups for backups in place. As much as possible, they made sure that more than one person on board was capable of repairing and sailing the craft. As I recall, life on board was a constant teaching process so every family member would eventually learn every necessary skill. The safety of everyone on board remained the highest priority.

From what has been made public, it seems as though in trying to execute this dream of EK's the Kaufmans may indeed have put in months of preparation. But, sadly, to me it appears as though their preparation was not broad enough in scope to fulfill the demands of that dream. IMO, the majority of the Kaufmans decisions, considered in the clarity of 20/20 hindsight, do not each the level of being calculated risks.

These are my own opinions and speculations.
 
  • #450
You are AWESOME! Your lengthy and detailed post encapsulated in a precise and informative manner what the rest of us (mostly) have been trying to articulate for months. Thank you!
 
  • #451
Morag said:
You are AWESOME! Your lengthy and detailed post encapsulated in a precise and informative manner what the rest of us (mostly) have been trying to articulate for months. Thank you!
Click to expand...

Agree! :loveyou:
Can we stop now? :deadhorse:
:D:D

:grouphug:
 
  • #452
a photo (almost naked) waiting at the doctor... LOL-ing over photos of (almost naked) thong(?) wearing men... a thrill-ride on the water part time job...

will he ever grow up?

https://plus.google.com/+EricKaufman/posts
 
  • #453
redheadedgal said:
a photo (almost naked) waiting at the doctor... LOL-ing over photos of (almost naked) thong(?) wearing men... a thrill-ride on the water part time job...

will he ever grow up?

https://plus.google.com/+EricKaufman/posts
Click to expand...


I think he was joking...

They're ad pictures. I posted them on steelys thread the other day because I thought they were hilarious,

Eric is an imbecile though...his anti vaccination meme is one of the most ignorant and frightening ones I've seen to date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #454
Linda7NJ said:
I think he was joking...

They're ad pictures. I posted them on steelys thread the other day because I thought they were hilarious,

Eric is an imbecile though...his anti vaccination meme is one of the most ignorant and frightening ones I've seen to date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

BBM

He and Charlotte are pro-vaccination, so I think he was making the same point. But it wasn't clear if you don't know that about them.
 
  • #455
Lilibet said:
BBM



He and Charlotte are pro-vaccination, so I think he was making the same point. But it wasn't clear if you don't know that about them.
Click to expand...


Ah well that's a relief!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #456
Linda7NJ said:
I think he was joking...

They're ad pictures. I posted them on steelys thread the other day because I thought they were hilarious,
snip
Click to expand...


hey linda. yeah, i got that he was joking/mocking...

i just find it childish... if one wants to be taken seriously/professionally, just keep those types of things private/friends only. but then the two of them seem to have no filter about anything :scared:

it's just not a trait i would find attractive in a man.
 
  • #457
redheadedgal said:
hey linda. yeah, i got that he was joking/mocking...

i just find it childish... if one wants to be taken seriously/professionally, just keep those types of things private/friends only. but then the two of them seem to have no filter about anything :scared:

it's just not a trait i would find attractive in a man.
Click to expand...


He's off the market & married. He found his soul mate for sure...

There is Nothing about him I find attractive. His joking about that banana hammock is the least of his issues;)





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #458
There is an interview today on Good Morning America with the Kaufman's.They are suing their satellite phone carrier to repay the rescue and to buy a new boat.
I can't seem to get the article or link to post.
 
  • #459
The last thing that couple needs is a new boat, IMO. Wait until the babies are older.

*I hope they lose the law suit. I understood they did not have to pay for the search & rescue?
 
  • #460
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 125 more.
Total: 2,008 (members: 126, guests: 1,882)

Online statistics

Members online
126
Guests online
1,882
Total visitors
2,008
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
633,402
Messages
18,641,506
Members
243,522
Latest member
bookmomma4
Back
Top