Rescue at sea for sick baby

[MyBelle]

Some people use re-usable pads which you would launder, dry and re-use. They are made from similar materials to modern cloth diapers. There is also the DIVA cup which is a re-usable menstrual cup. I assume she is referring to one or both of these options.

Both options do require a modicum of sanitation which is pretty essential to keep an infant healthy. Very difficult to keep an infant healthy in a confined space whether on land or sea.

JMO

 

[1&2&3]

Gee, no wonder they had salmonella! There was only one sink on the boat and it was used for everything! Yuck!

 

[SophieRose]

Thanks for checking that. I couldn't bear to comb through her blogs for the cup reference. I do remember it, so she must have used both. As Kermit the Frog would say..."It's not easy being green." And as Lamb Chop (ours, not the puppet) mentioned, why blog about it?! Are modesty and privacy old-fashioned?

But she had that audience on her blog that were applauding her every move, telling her how real she was. Were they real? Today she has a whole new audience and is probably spending a lot of her time deleting posts.

 

[Snoods]

Gee, no wonder they had salmonella! There was only one sink on the boat and it was used for everything! Yuck!

Ugh, I know. Could they really have been that clueless about what was causing the salmonella outbreak? Wild animals won't even poop where they eat and sleep.

 

[LambChop]

Ugh, I know. Could they really have been that clueless about what was causing the salmonella outbreak? Wild animals won't even poop where they eat and sleep.

They were not on the boat when she discovered both she and her daughter had salmonella. They were living in the apartment in Mexico, I believe.

 

[Linda7NJ]

But she had that audience on her blog that were applauding her every move, telling her how real she was. Were they real? Today she has a whole new audience and is probably spending a lot of her time deleting posts.

Maybe her husband could take that over so he could at least say he has a job....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lilibet]

They were not on the boat when she discovered both she and her daughter had salmonella. They were living in the apartment in Mexico, I believe.

According to this post, they were on the boat, preparing to leave when she posted about the salmonella diagnosis on March 11.

http://www.therebelheart.com/charlottes-blog/2014/3/11/not-gone-yet-almost.html

They lived in the apartment in September 2013.

http://www.therebelheart.com/charlo...cal-storm-ivo-hi-tropical-storm-juliette.html

Who knows when they actually contracted salmonella. It was a chronic low grade kind without the usual symptoms. She and Lyra could have had it for awhile, even in the apartment.

 

[LadyL]

I read quite a lot of her blog yesterday and I'm having trouble figuring out why people are being so nasty about them. Is it that the rescue cost taxpayers a lot of money and people think they are too carefree about the whole ordeal? Or is there more? What am I missing?

I'm going to go back and read more here and over there and try to figure this out cause it seems (to my admittedly mostly uninformed mind) that the vitriol is extreme and out of proportion.

I could be wrong. If so, please point me in the right direction.

 

[MyBelle]

I read quite a lot of her blog yesterday and I'm having trouble figuring out why people are being so nasty about them. Is it that the rescue cost taxpayers a lot of money and people think they are too carefree about the whole ordeal? Or is there more? What am I missing?

I'm going to go back and read more here and over there and try to figure this out cause it seems (to my admittedly mostly uninformed mind) that the vitriol is extreme and out of proportion.

I could be wrong. If so, please point me in the right direction.

Not much to figure out, imo. I doubt the rescue will be the last costs to the taxpayers to protect the kids of parents who put themselves first. The outcome was easily foreseeable by anyone with common sense. A sick baby on a small sailboat in the middle of the rocking ocean. All the color-coordinating in the world is not going to alter that recipe for disaster.

JMO

 

[Lilibet]

I read quite a lot of her blog yesterday and I'm having trouble figuring out why people are being so nasty about them. Is it that the rescue cost taxpayers a lot of money and people think they are too carefree about the whole ordeal? Or is there more? What am I missing?

I'm going to go back and read more here and over there and try to figure this out cause it seems (to my admittedly mostly uninformed mind) that the vitriol is extreme and out of proportion.

I could be wrong. If so, please point me in the right direction.

Thanks for raising this issue LadyL. I agree that there is a lot of nastiness and harsh criticism of the Kaufman's, especially on social media and MSM comments sections. Some of it is horrible, insulting and obscene. No one deserves that.

Although there are times here on WS that we may have veered into harsh criticism and sarcasm, I hope we can reel that in, and I apologize if I have gone too far. It's a tricky tightrope and frustration makes balance difficult.

I can only speak for myself, but I don't really care about the money spent to rescue them. They seem to be "paying it forward" by suggesting that donations go to a worthy charity. I'm OK with that.

I care about the kids who were taken on a journey by unprepared parents who will not admit that they should have waited. I'm upset that their arrogance almost cost them their lives and endangered their rescuers. As I've said several times, I have no problem with raising kids on a boat and sailing with them when they are a little older, and don't need constant care, AND if both parents are competent sailors.

They lost everything, and I have compassion for them, even though they were largely responsible. But in their blogging, their responses to people expressing legitimate concerns, and their nasty comments on CF and FB, they have shown unbelievable arrogance both before they sailed and now. They are thin-skinned, take offense easily and take themselves waaaay too seriously. Here's an example: http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f92/how-do-you-store-your-jewelry-25655.html

So, IMO they have learned nothing and are unwilling to learn. And that concerns me for the children. But I also think we are probably beating a dead horse here, and any criticism they read seems to make their determination stronger. At this point we're probably posting in an "I can't believe they said/did that" way. Every small detail that they have written in their own words has revealed them to be ill-equipped for a voyage like this and too self-involved to see it. JMO

 

[CHERIE.T]

I read quite a lot of her blog yesterday and I'm having trouble figuring out why people are being so nasty about them. Is it that the rescue cost taxpayers a lot of money and people think they are too carefree about the whole ordeal? Or is there more? What am I missing?

I'm going to go back and read more here and over there and try to figure this out cause it seems (to my admittedly mostly uninformed mind) that the vitriol is extreme and out of proportion.

I could be wrong. If so, please point me in the right direction.

Hard to comment about a case or story without most of the facts.
Many think this couple planned a trip around the world haphazardly without proper training, proper supplies and with not much thought about the babies. Their words make them appear pompous and careless.
HONESTLY, We at WS have no control on what's said on SM.

 

[tezi]

I agree with everything you said except one. I hope they never try this again. This couple, from their blog posts, message board posts, etc., appears far too arrogant and stubborn to be equipped for something like this. Again, for me it's not that they took children on an adventure. Instead, it's (as many others have said), that their arrogance made them believe that being ill-equipped and inexperienced didn't matter.



Reminds me of another infamous person's lovely online presence. Kate Parker anyone?



Yes, it would be. But they do not appear to have learned the lesson at all.

This is an extremely arrogant couple. They appeared very ready to lambaste others for making the same mistakes they ultimately did (and worse), and skewering those who made polite suggestions to wait, and now are accusing everyone who has criticized their decision-making, as conformist idiots. I think that arrogance is the very reason for the trouble they got into.

To them:
1. No one dared tell them they were too inexperienced when it came to open ocean sailing, to try such a trip.
2. No one dared tell them they might consider postponing the trip until Charlotte felt better.
3. No one dared tell them they might consider postponing the trip until their children were totally well and off medication.
4. No one dared tell them that their boat was not fit for such a voyage as it is prone to taking on water, and is very small for rough seas and a trip with two children and was jimmy rigged by the husband.
5. No one dared tell them they were ill-equipped for such a voyage, with a boat that had unsanitary conditions, without pot locks, without the size and safety mechanism built in to prevent small children from rolling into the ocean or getting tossed around by high waves, with only 30 gallons of gas, etc., etc.

Their extremely defensive and critical post-disaster comments evidence these people have not learned from this event and, coupled with their past displays of extreme arrogance, that they are unlikely to in the future.

If people want to risk their lives doing crazy things due to a deluded sense of grandeur, fine. But when they decide to take two babies along for the ride, it becomes everyone's business and it becomes very, very serious.

These people should never be allowed to take their children near a boat again, unless a professional is in charge and at the helm.



I can imagine how safe and easy that would be, to boil hot water on the stove, in a tiny boat, with no pot locks, that's rolling in seriously heavy seas. Oh,s he also had to wash out and reuse her sanitary pad as well. Ick.

Thanks was not enough for your post gitana1! You said everything I was thinking!

Again, thank you for saying everything I could not put into words!

JMO

 

[Lilibet]

I was thinking this morning about people who live their lives seeking to be free of society's constraints and expectations, following their own dreams. Whether they are cruising on boats, traveling full time in RV's or "going back to the land" (both of which I have done), living in their cars so they can travel to climb rocks...their goal is freedom and adventure. In many cases, they are seeking to get away from a world that seems doomed...either for their own survival or at least to live free as long as possible.

Those thoughts took me waaaay back to a couple of songs from over 40 years ago. "Wooden Ships" by Crosby, Stills and Nash was about escaping an apocalypse, leaving it all behind as they sailed away. Jackson Browne's response was the song "For Everyman", saying, "but what about everyone else?"

I think this may be part of what sticks in my craw about Rebel Heart. And it isn't just the Kaufman's. There is a groundswell of aggressive, self-involved individualism in society now, whether people live unconventional lives or not. I see a growing attitude of "I'm going to do my own thing, no matter how it impacts anyone else. My freedom is all that matters." "YOLO--you only live once."

Freedom and adventure are exciting, but like Jackson Browne, I prefer to contemplate "I am part of mankind. What can I do for others? Why is following my dream more important than helping others? Can I use my dream as a way to do positive things 'for Everyman'?"

JMO

BBM

Shortly after releasing his first album, Browne left Los Angeles where he'd grown up. He moved to the Bay Area of California where he looked for a house. He was invited to live with David Crosby on Crosby's boat, The Mayan. He stayed there several months, not finding a home to rent or purchase, before going on tour to support his recently finished and released album.[1] While staying with Crosby, Browne was introduced to two of Crosby's neighbors, who also owned boats. The two friends along with Crosby, often talked about fulfilling their idyllic dream of simply sailing off into the "sunset," presumably somewhere to the South Pacific. This was a few years after Crosby, Stephen Stills, and Graham Nash had released their single "Wooden Ships." Crosby stated that the songwriters "imagined ourselves as the few survivors, escaping on a boat to create a new civilization."[2][3][4] Browne admits that the dreamers were in a bit of a "fog," and composed his song as a response to their unrealizable dream. On his album "Solo Acoustic, Vol. 1," Browne relays the story that the song was written "having spent some time with some people who were planning to sail away... I mean, and they had the boats to do it in, they knew what they were doing, they kinda had it all planned... Well, I won't say that they knew what they were doing, but they had a plan."

As Anthony DeCurtis told it in a 1999 retrospective album review of For Everyman, "The title track of Jackson Browne's second album, For Everyman, was a response to the escapist vision of Crosby, Stills and Nash's 'Wooden Ships.' As violence, fear and paranoia overtook Sixties utopianism, 'Wooden Ships' (written by Crosby and Stills, along with Paul Kanter of the Jefferson Airplane) imagined a kind of hipster exodus by sea from a straight world teetering on the edge of apocalypse: 'We are leaving/You don't need us,' the song declared.

Browne wasn't giving up so easily... (He) sings in his characteristic long, fluid lines:"

Everybody I talk to is ready to leave with the light of the morning.
They've seen the end coming down long enough to believe that they've heard their last warning...
But all my fine dreams, well-thought-out schemes to gain the motherland
Have all eventually come down to waiting for Everyman.

"Deliverance must come for everyone, Browne insisted, not just hippie troubadours," wrote DeCurtis.[3][4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Everyman_(song)

 

[LadyL]

Hard to comment about a case or story without most of the facts.
Many think this couple planned a trip around the world haphazardly without proper training, proper supplies and with not much thought about the babies. Their words make them appear pompous and careless.
HONESTLY, We at WS have no control on what's said on SM.

I believe I had most of the facts when I posted. I suggested I may not have ALL the facts because it's a bit difficult to read every single blog post and every single news story and every single post here. I was asking for more information, not generalities and certainly not for anyone to take it personally. I probably should have said something different than 'admittedly mostly uniformed mind' because that was an exaggeration and gave the wrong idea about my knowledge. I think I assumed I didn't have enough knowledge because I couldn't understand the strong reaction I was seeing.

Her husband is an experienced sailor and from all accounts, they planned years in advance by living on the boat first. I read that her sick baby was cleared by a doctor for travel.

If this is really about how people don't like them, then let's call it what it is and not pretend it's about lack of training, supplies, and preparation. I still haven't seen any quote from either of them that makes them appear 'pompous and careless' so I'm going to chalk that up to subjectivity.

I have no idea what your social media comment is referring to?

 

[LadyL]

Not much to figure out, imo. I doubt the rescue will be the last costs to the taxpayers to protect the kids of parents who put themselves first. The outcome was easily foreseeable by anyone with common sense. A sick baby on a small sailboat in the middle of the rocking ocean. All the color-coordinating in the world is not going to alter that recipe for disaster.

JMO

Fair enough. So people think they are selfish and lack common sense. That's an entirely subjective pov though. I'm the first one to jump on people who don't put their children first - I just don't necessarily see that here. For example, I might think it's wrong for some parents to let their kids run around outside unsupervised ... others might think it's fine.

 

[CHERIE.T]

It simply boils down to this...
When one reads pretty much anything written by the husband on the blogs.... His pompous comments stand out.

 

[basilcat]

I read quite a lot of her blog yesterday and I'm having trouble figuring out why people are being so nasty about them. Is it that the rescue cost taxpayers a lot of money and people think they are too carefree about the whole ordeal? Or is there more? What am I missing?

I'm going to go back and read more here and over there and try to figure this out cause it seems (to my admittedly mostly uninformed mind) that the vitriol is extreme and out of proportion.

I could be wrong. If so, please point me in the right direction.

Seriously?
Really?
Begin at C-A-K-E...

Then look up the definition of selfish..
Negligent...
Narcissists...

Some of those should help..


Did you really read it and no alarm bells?

 

[LadyL]

Thanks for raising this issue LadyL. I agree that there is a lot of nastiness and harsh criticism of the Kaufman's, especially on social media and MSM comments sections. Some of it is horrible, insulting and obscene. No one deserves that.

Although there are times here on WS that we may have veered into harsh criticism and sarcasm, I hope we can reel that in, and I apologize if I have gone too far. It's a tricky tightrope and frustration makes balance difficult.

I can only speak for myself, but I don't really care about the money spent to rescue them. They seem to be "paying it forward" by suggesting that donations go to a worthy charity. I'm OK with that.

I care about the kids who were taken on a journey by unprepared parents who will not admit that they should have waited. I'm upset that their arrogance almost cost them their lives and endangered their rescuers. As I've said several times, I have no problem with raising kids on a boat and sailing with them when they are a little older, and don't need constant care, AND if both parents are competent sailors.

They lost everything, and I have compassion for them, even though they were largely responsible. But in their blogging, their responses to people expressing legitimate concerns, and their nasty comments on CF and FB, they have shown unbelievable arrogance both before they sailed and now. They are thin-skinned, take offense easily and take themselves waaaay too seriously. Here's an example: http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f92/how-do-you-store-your-jewelry-25655.html

So, IMO they have learned nothing and are unwilling to learn. And that concerns me for the children. But I also think we are probably beating a dead horse here, and any criticism they read seems to make their determination stronger. At this point we're probably posting in an "I can't believe they said/did that" way. Every small detail that they have written in their own words has revealed them to be ill-equipped for a voyage like this and too self-involved to see it. JMO

I don't especially like their personalities but I don't agree that they were ill-equipped or careless. Arrogant maybe? I don't think sailing with young kids is ideal either but it's not necessarily wrong IMO.

I don't even have compassion for them. I mean, they lost a boat but they could've lost their kids so I don't give a cracker about the boat or their belongings.

I've read at the link you provided and read further on her blog and I still don't see what's got everyone's feathers flying but that's ok. We're all different and we're all allowed to have opinions.

The way I see it, there are three issues here:

1. 'careless' parenting
2. 'arrogant' attitude
3. taxpayer rescue money

I think people are twisting them all up together in a ball and throwing it to see what sticks - I think this is more about #2 than #1 and #3 - that's just MOO.

 

[LadyL]

Seriously?
Really?
Begin at C-A-K-E...

Then look up the definition of selfish..
Negligent...
Narcissists...

Some of those should help..


Did you really read it and no alarm bells?

alarm bells that she's annoying yes

alarm bells that she's negligent no

I'll keep reading though ...

 

[Lilibet]

<snipped for focus>

We're all different and we're all allowed to have opinions.

True dat.