A woman has taken to social media to try and get a refund from Carnival Cruise Lines after her daughter was denied boarding due to being 26 weeks pregnant.
Kaylee Farrington and her mother were due to board a 3-night cruise on Carnival Luminosa, sailing out of Brisbane in Australia when she was told that she would not be permitted on the cruise.
Carnival only permits pregnant women on cruise ships up to 24 weeks – and that 24-week deadline must be up to the last day of the cruise.
Farrington’s mother asked for a refund as she had paid for the cruise, only to be denied because the cruise line stated that the fault lies with the passengers for not reading their contract.
The women said that they thought the terminal crew were joking, and have since argued that the rules are discriminatory against pregnant women, stating that many airlines allow guests to fly up to 28 weeks pregnant.
They also complained that they were not told about this rule at the time of booking, though it’s not clear whether Farrington was pregnant when the cruise was booked.
This policy restricts travel for pregnant women beyond their 24th week of pregnancy and is designed to ensure the safety and wellbeing of both mothers and their unborn babies. Cruise ships are not equipped with facilities to deal with prenatal and early infant care.
Carnival Cruise Lines spokesperson
Certain travel insurance policies can cover cancellation costs if a guest can no longer travel due to becoming pregnant, but neither Farrington or her mother have confirmed whether they bought a suitable policy to qualify for a refund.
NEW DEALS JUST RELEASED!
See the latest Carnival cruise offers…
Related Posts
- Cruising While Pregnant: Everything You Need to Know
- Sober Cruises: How To Cruise Alcohol-Free
- Do Cruise Ships Have Doctors?
Jenni Fielding is the founder of Cruise Mummy. She has worked in the cruise industry since 2015 and has taken over 30 cruises. Now, she helps over 1 million people per month to plan their perfect cruise holidays.
I book a cruise recently. I am way past child bearing age but even I knew this rule.
Cruise company is totally right. If anything happened they would be the first to sue.
The women are lucky the cruise company care more for the safety of the baby than they do.
If the passenger had bothered to read the conditions she would have realised she couldn’t travel. The cruise line could then have sold her cabin to someone else; she deprived them of that opportunity. Surely a women in late-stage pregnancy would ask herself: are there any problems with my travelling, I need to check. The passenger was sloppy. Nevertheless, the cruise line should offer her a voucher for a future trip on an ex gratia basis.
They were right to refuse. The fact that airlines have 28 weeks is that a plane travels faster and can divert much easier is obvious.
Anyone who is pregnant should thoroughly check out regulations BEFORE travelling. They’re clearly written and the woman should have checked before travelling.
Although it’s infuriating, it’s the customer’s responsibility to read the t&c, therefore the cruise line was in the right on both.
Unfortunately the cruiser is at fault here. The contract clearly states the rule, and the cruiser felt that a physician who would suffer no consequences could just write her a note. Too many things can go wrong for mom &/or fetus, these ships are not equipped or staffed for those problems. Just regular wellness is out of the ships’ wheelhouse. She should have reviewed her contract, did not, and found she is not entitled.
If it’s there in black and white then they should have read the t’s and c’s ) which a lot of us don’t!
On this occasion the cruise line was correct, because obviously if the worst happened and the ship had to divert a few thousand passengers would be inconvenienced by a possible missed port or a shorter stay, and probable extra cost for the cruise company, so if you don’t read the terms and conditions you cannot question them
No refund, should have read medical exclusions.