SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Ocean baby rescue underway off Mexico

86K views 619 replies 90 participants last post by  smackdaddy 
#1 ·
A U.S. Navy warship reached a crippled sailboat hundreds of kilometres off the Mexican coast and was preparing Sunday to complete the rescue of a sick one-year-old girl.

"...the sailboat, which does not have steering or communication abilities" - this can't be right. According to the article the sailboat takes on water when the engine runs, so "It's now slowly moving using only the sails." Doesn't mention any issue with the rudder etc. I guess that must be another example of journalistic accuracy in action.

I hope all goes well with the transfer, and with the family's voyage.
 
#2 ·
If it didn't have communication capabilities, how'd they radio the Navy that they had a sick child and needed help? Fox showed several (four) rescue divers jumping from the rear of a C130 and said that they administered medication to the child. Never mentioned a problem with the weather or the boat. (I'm assuming that this is the same story you are referring to after all how many one year olds need emergency attention while sailing on a boat in any given day?) The bigger question in Fox news's mind was: Should they be allowed to sail with an infant on board and/or should they be required to pay the cost of providing the emergency services? HMMM. I'll get my popcorn and THEN let the discourse begin!:D
 
#6 ·
If it didn't have communication capabilities, how'd they radio the Navy that they had a sick child and needed help? Fox showed several (four) rescue divers jumping from the rear of a C130 and said that they administered medication to the child. Never mentioned a problem with the weather or the boat. (I'm assuming that this is the same story you are referring to after all how many one year olds need emergency attention while sailing on a boat in any given day?) The bigger question in Fox news's mind was: Should they be allowed to sail with an infant on board and/or should they be required to pay the cost of providing the emergency services? HMMM. I'll get my popcorn and THEN let the discourse begin!:D
Children have been sailing as long as humans have been sailing and by all accounts, this family was well prepared, and, the impression is that the child became ill after some time at sea. I don't see how blame can be placed on the parents.
 
#3 ·
The reportage here sounds just like when it's a firearm story: minimum BS content of 75%. Clueless reporters spewing sensational, headline-grabbing soundbites for the clueless audience to be thrilled and appalled by.

The ethics question is worthy of debate; it would just be nice if the media would do their job half as well as the Navy does theirs.
 
#8 ·
It's a pirated Bob Perry design and therefore chock full of PFM*.



Union 36 Boat Review - Practical Sailor Article

In a blog by the late Terry Bingham, a Union 36 owner, Perry is quoted as saying that "the yard went on to continue building the boat, but they marketed it under whatever name the individual broker wanted, so that's why you find the same boat with so many names ... Hans Christian 36, Mariner Polaris 36, Union 36, EO 36-all the same boat. The Mao Ta 36 is a variation on the same hull but built by a different yard. [The Union 36] is a very good boat and in every way very similar to most of my early double-enders. It's a bastard child of mine, and I will continue to feel like the father."
*PFM: Pure F'g Magic
 
#7 ·
Wow, the comments that people are leaving on their blog are horrific! Apparently the fat folks munching cheetoes on their couches watching the news have strong opinions about sailing with kids. Child abuse? Demanding that CPS take their kids away from them permanently.... :(

I'm just going to stop talking now, before the pressure builds and the gasket blows.... :mad:

Medsailor
 
#11 ·
Yes! But I don't have to like what people say, and I can say what I want back, which is part of the deal.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE free speech, but at the same time I don't like the comments people were leaving on that blog. I think they should have the right to say what they have, but as decent human beings, I don't think they should have exercised their right in the way they did. Pretty crass to judge them so harshly while they are in the middle of a family health crisis.

Medsailor
 
#15 ·
#16 ·
This breaks my heart in so many ways. They'll recover. The child seems stable and will be fine, too. But we're certainly not going to see the criticism die for a while. That's unfortunate. It is human nature to second guess a situation that's gone bad and requires a rescue. God forbid any of us should find ourselves in something similar. Until we have more to go on, it sounds like this family did everything right that they could; so let's let them heal and give them an opportunity to defend themselves before ripping them apart on something that 99.9% of the public (maybe even 99% of the sailing crowd) will never have the cojones to do. Ever.
 
#18 ·
I, for one, can't condone taking a child that young off-shore. When little kids get sick things can go south really fast. Being more than a quick car ride from medical help when you have such a young child is just not very smart. Sure kids have gone to sea, and even been born at sea, since humans fist started sailing. But guess what? Many of them also died. In "the old days", say more than a hundred years ago or so, even the best medical care couldn't do much for a really sick kid; being on a boat or on dry land probably didn't make that much difference. But things are different today. The tragedy that almost happened in this case was entirely preventable.

I'm not saying little kids, maybe even infants, shouldn't be taken on sailing trips. But off-shore? No way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flo617
#21 ·
Here's what I have to say to all the people who will be criticizing. Let he whom is without sin cast the first stone. have you ever put a kid in a car without proper seat belt then you are an irresponsible parent. have you ever let a kid under 18 light the fire works then you are an irresponsible parent. and on and on. Everyone has done things that could have ended up in damage being done or someone being hurt. As far as I'm concerned the criticizers are laughable.
 
#23 · (Edited)
As someone who is a medical provider, and has spent half his medical career so far in Emergency Medicine or Urgent Medicine, I take issue with the premise that a healthy one year old child must be kept near a medical facility at all times because a life threatening illness may develop at any time.

Now if you're in your 7th or 8th decade of life and have already had 2 heart attacks, then yes, by all means, do the tax payer a favor and live across the street from Mass General. Regular, healthy, immunized one year olds? They're not all dropping like flies and being saved by the ambulances (I used to run one of those too) all the time.

Yes, kids go from well to sick quicker than adults, but usually they go right back to well faster than grown ups. My 2 year old had a fever of 103.5 a couple weeks ago and very quickly looked really bad. An hour later, he looked great. A LOT of what we do in urgent care is pat worried parents on the head, observe the kid for an hour or to, and let them go home having done pretty much nothing at all. Croup, for example, can be REALLY scary to watch, but usually the kids get through it without aggressive intervention.

It appears this poor 1 year old tyke got salmonella. That's perhaps more of a hazard out at sea, but it's a hazard that potentially exists in every kitchen and McDonald's as well. From what the news is saying, the kid was "in stable condition" as soon as the frogs got there. It's entirely plausible that the kid maybe would have been fine without medical care. We may never know. Even if the kid was saved by the medical team, it's lightning strike odds that it happened when they were as far as they could possibly be from help. Wouldn't have made news at all if they were in Cabo and wandered down to the local doctor's office and got some Cipro. In fact, the kid was probably only going to be away from potential medical help for a few weeks total during an entire circumnavigation.

Healthy kids just don't need to be kept near a hospital at all times unless there is a known underlying illness.

MedSailor
 
#24 ·
As someone who is a medical provider, and has spent half his medical career so far in Emergency Medicine or Urgent Medicine, I take issue with the premise that a healthy one year old child must be kept near a medical facility at all times because a life threatening illness may develop at any time....
A someone who watched an otherwise healthy 4-year-old go from having a run-of-the-mill cold to pneumonia, complete with 106˚ fever, overnight I can tell you that I would never take a little kid off-shore, NEVER.

...Now if you're in your 7th or 8th decade of life and have already had 2 heart attacks, then yes, by all means, do the tax payer a favor and live across the street from Mass General. ...
If a septuagenarian wants to attempt re-creating Robin Knox-Johnson's Golden Globe Race I would say, "more power to you!" (particularly if that septuagenarian were Sir Robin himself). Any adult making such a decision is fine with me. But that isn't the case here, is it? Risking a little kid's life by taking them off-shore sailing, simply because you can wait a few years, is kinda like not vaccinating them against measles or mumps. If an adults want to make informed decisions that risks their own lives, fine. But this thread involves making such a decision that risks the life of a little kid. Not the same thing at all.
 
#25 ·
I am really sick of hearing others here and on Rebel Heart's blog criticizing the parents right to take their child off shore. Such strong, close-minded, uniformed zealots ranting and attacking these very loving parents is despicable! This is like mob mentality. Most have no idea what cruising, sailing or even sailboats are like and most have no idea of just how many kids are out there with their parents. All this talk about " call CPS, make them pay", is such holier than thou crap that is just sickens me. I know people like you. Let us hope your foul, nasty ranting's come back and bite you. Leave these people alone!
 
#31 ·
Having raised 3 kids in a very natural way (as few doctor's visits as possible), I see nothing wrong with taking kids for long offshore trips. Most of the time kids get sick from other people. I hope this family keeps their dreams alive despite all the negativity and criticism.
 
#34 ·
Hold on folks. I never said anything about sicking the authorities (e.g., Child Protective Services) on the parents. I didn't even say that I would flat-out condemn them. I simply said that I can't condone their choice to take their kids off-shore, nor would I nominate them for parents of the year. This may surprise some people, but the world isn't just black and white. There are plenty of shades of gray to just about every situation.

Personally, I sure as hell wouldn't risk my kids' lives the way these parents did. Coastal cruising, fine. But I would wait until the kids are a few years older before I ventured off-shore. I'm funny that way; I make my kid wear a seatbelt in the car, I make her wear a helmet while on her bike, I make sure her vaccinations are up to date, I don't let her pet the coyotes that roam our neighborhood, and (gasp!!) I make her wear a PFD when we're on the boat.
 
#36 ·
My wife and I were reflecting on when our kids were these ages....it really sucked. It was wonderful and magical and stuff but when I look back it was pretty sucky. And I am sure it would be nice to spend the time at anchorages and nice little beaches but I can not imaging changing a poopy diaper at 0300 in a blow. Yes, I am sure some people could hang with that and for those they should go for it. But I am just imagining baby poop all over the cushions....
 
#37 ·
It's been 9 years since our boys were infants/toddlers. The "selfishness" that everyone is hammering on in these two is pretty common. At that point with brand new kids, if you're at all an adventurous sort, you're just starting to transition from living your life for you as a couple, to living your life for your kids. And it's not easy - for anyone. EVERYONE complains about this at the beginning to some degree (like they did on their blog). So I don't buy into the hysterical "bad parent" stuff.

As I said above, the mistake these people made was taking WAY too big a bite on the adventure side at this stage of their family (a 3K mile passage?). This greatly amplified all the issues you deal with as a very young parent.

I hope when they get back they go "underground" and work on their family and marriage and future adventures. If they go the media route, it won't be pretty.
 
#39 ·
It seems sort of selfish to take an infant on a long offshore passage. I am not saying it cannot or should not be done, I just cannot imagine ever considering it with my own son until he's of an age where the experience would mean something to him and contribute to his life in positive ways. A baby does not get anything out of being confined to a boat at sea for weeks at a time, and I believe it compromises the ability to provide for the baby's needs.
 
#47 ·
There seems to be a lot of medical BS involved with many of the posts. First and foremost, no one is put on three different antibiotics simultaneously - it just doesn't work that way. The only way that could happen would be if some idiot decided to do this on their own. No physician I know would ever consider this type of therapy for a URI. And, it could be downright dangerous, especially with young children. And, on top of that, steroids - not a prayer - not with little kids. That would be insane unless the kids were constantly being monitored in a hospital situation. How do I know this? Well, I spent 15 years working in cardio-pulmonary medicine at two of the largest hospitals in Maryland. I saw lots of nasty URI cases, and salmonella cases came in the ER nearly every day of the week. Before posting anything else on this, I would wait for the REAL information to come forth. Too many things just don't sound correct.

Gary :cool:
 
#49 ·
and another high and mighty forum with 20/20 vision...

I read the 1 year old baby had an unkwon heart disease develop midway...so lets stop the whole criticism...and hope they recover the boat and baby gets well



cheers
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top